digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Adopting Ubuntu: Linux switch can be painless, free

cbc.ca — For many people, e-mail, web surfing, picture editing, listening to music, making spreadsheets and basic word processing are just about all they do with their computers. Today's Macs and Windows PCs are impressive machines indeed, but their power- and price- can be overkill for the average computer user. If looking for a new computer, try Linux.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • generalloy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19The history of Linux or GNU/Linux he has is really kind of smudging things together (GNU project), and there are some other problems with the article that maybe an average user wouldn't know, like gaming via WINE or native Linux games, but it's good otherwise :)
    • Haplo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Yup, contacted the author yesterday on this. Probably won't get corrected because it sounds so much cooler that one guy wrote an entire operating system and all applications. Like doing "just" a kernel is not enough.
    • cbasst, on 10/12/2007, -22/+2linux is just too expensive
    • daven1986, on 10/12/2007, -23/+6im sorry but ***** ubuntu. when i tried it, it was so confusing to use, they try to hide stuff under too many levels of indirection (like vista has now done). i tried fedora and it was much easier to use. it is now my main OS.
    • schoate09, on 10/12/2007, -17/+10Like I said, easy out of box, heaven forbid something's not in synaptic (like flash, java, or you wanna game in WINE, that's 5 hours of howtos and forum questions, only to be responded too as READ THE HOTWO). Commercial software that Wine doesn't wanna do, well, all the GNU replacements suck. (Including OOo). Really, ***** ubuntu and these circle jerks. The OOB is nice, but after that it's hell, especially with gfx, wireless, and laptops.

      It cant replace windows, i'm tired of these articles.
    • cwshea, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Hasn't really told me anything I didn't know except for where Linus Torvalds is/was from.

      Still, I'm going to be switching a newish but really messed up (not physically, just Windows) desktop over to Ubuntu. I need to get a blank CD first... I've had the installer on this computer (laptop) for a few weeks :-)
    • shinkaide, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13@schoate09:

      Um, yes it can. A lot of companies (and even entire countries) are switching to Linux (not just ubuntu per se). It's hell to be a gamer and use Linux, but for everything else, Linux does the job quite well.

      Guess what OS digg runs on?
    • UNL1M1T3D, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14@shoate099

      If your sick of reading those articles, stop reading about them, and don't comment on them. I like Ubuntu personally (got it dual booted with XP Pro x64), and use it basically for everything besides gaming and the odd task I can't use Ubuntu for. I think Ubuntu is good, but still needs some work before it becomes mainstream.
  • 72Devilz, on 10/12/2007, -23/+13"If looking for a new computer, try Linux." or try the local dump, some real treasures can be found there. Scored a 1.8ghz celleron, 256mb ram and 80gig hd PC and a Thinkpad 600 last week alone, little troubleshooting, new cmos batteries, Ubuntu/Kubuntu and they are good as new not to mention free. Just dont tell anybody I'm a Machead, whoops too late! :p
    • syncosoftkerala, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26Oh Puh-leease! Like I haven't tried that already! All I found was a G5, with 'I hate macs' spray-painted on it...
  • kettlechips, on 10/12/2007, -9/+27Dig this, it is a real news source, not some guy's blog.
    • godd4242, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Just wish someone told him about WINE and / or Cedega, hell even Linux native games.
      But still, nice to have a real news article rather than someones blog.
  • jimilarue512, on 10/12/2007, -79/+11"If looking for a new computer, try Linux."

    No way a novice buying a new computer could use Linux/Ubuntu, no way at all. My mom would totally stop using computers if she had to open up a Terminal Window and start typing commands.

    You know it and I know it. So STFU

    • Ricapar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+48You don't need to use a terminal for web browsing, nor spreadsheets, nor word processing, nor email.
    • Amablue, on 10/12/2007, -1/+27Most people who only need to use the computer for email, internet and basic office work would never need to open a terminal. The worst they might need to do is go to Applications -> add/remove and add a program.

      To a complete newbie, Windows would be just as difficult as Linux, assuming both are already installed and running.
    • bysin, on 10/12/2007, -5/+27This guy is either trolling, or has never used linux before.
    • RubeusEsclair, on 10/12/2007, -23/+11I set up an old machine like that for my sister--EdUbuntu. She hates it with a passion. Linux really isn't user-friendly enough for most users yet.
    • tech10171968, on 10/12/2007, -4/+22jimilarue512 sounds like Steve Ballmer's bitch.

      If you can seperate your lips from Mr Ballmer's privates for a second, I'd like to show you my Debian desktop. You know how I get online? I simply move my cursor to "Firefox" or "Opera" and click on the icon. That simple. No terminal, no command line. If you would have researched the subject a bit before commenting on it then you would have seen that. But instead you rehash some long-debunked stereotypes about linux; a lot of the FUD you probably believe about Linux was addressed a very long time ago.

      Maybe it's *YOU* who needs to STFU.
    • whiskeysquared, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9The linux switch is bittersweet to me. I love the concept of open source and linux and the goals of Ubuntu; but to say it is user friendly enough from start to finish is misleading a bit. For example, there are new naming conventions when moving from windows to Linux. Not to say that windows makes any more sense than Linux's conventions, but it's what a vast majority are used to. Configuring Ubuntu on a system that wasn't specifically built to run linux can be painful. If you don't support that statement you're in denial. A basic windows user switching to Ubuntu will probably be put off when he/she is forced to search the depths of a forum in order to figure out how to get Ubuntu to play well with his/her hardware, they probably will go mad trying to do a lot of things to get the experience on par. From big things like figuring out the file structure or drivers to little, highly complicated problems like getting fonts to look decent (especially in firefox). In my opinion, being a recreational user turned user of Ubuntu, some of these things plagued me. And yes, a person can find the answers to these questions by digging through twenty miles of forum posts, or asking a question but that's another strike against usability.

      That said, Linux as a whole is solid, but there are still a lot of usability wrinkles to iron out. It certainly doesn't "just work" once you go through the install process. I would consider "just working" being on par or better than the windows install I just came from. This ranges from performance to the GUI. This has to be taken into consideration: Not everyone is going to have linux preinstalled for them, some will need to do it themselves, and that needs to be optimized.
    • prammy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@jimilarue

      Can you please enlighten me with these required terminal commands you speak of? I use Fedora, used Ubuntu in the past and I can't seem to remember typing any terminal commands to do my day to day tasks.

      But I *DO* use the terminal for a few things, like pinging a machine, sshing to another and some sysadmin tasks which have guis but is faster for me to type the commands rather than go 3 menus deep and then click it.
    • jimilarue512, on 10/12/2007, -19/+3@ everyone who said something to me....

      Try telling your mom how to install wifi on a linux machine. Matter of fact, try helping me out I still can't get my ***** to work.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6http://www.linuxant.com/driverloader/?PHPSESSID=802033e39ae6c9651149dc6f3a55fee1
    • schroeder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@jimilarue512
      http://ndiswrapper.sourceforge.net/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page
    • atdigg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8@jimilarue512 You should use WIndows.
    • Sicarul, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@whiskeysquared:
      The kind of users you are talking about don't know how to install Windows either, i don't see your point. I've installed Windows XP more than once on a friend's computer because he didn't know how to, or just didn't want to risk their data by doing it themselves, which is fine, but as much as i don't expect them to install Windows, i can't expect them to install a Linux distribution. That said, i think Ubuntu's install is better, i don't know if easier, but being able to resize partitions at install... doesn't get much easier than that.

      @jimilarue512:
      I agree with atdigg, stop bitching, just use Windows if you want to.
    • godd4242, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3@jaidiot or whatever your name is

      ;_;

      Use one of the programs other people just gave you

      or alternatively, stay the ***** away from my Ubuntu

      I don't need you whining on my forums dude, especially when it's so clear you're just ***** around and don't have an idea of what you're talking about.

      EDIT:
      Forgot about Wubi for a minute.

      Google it for all those people interested in Ubuntu, it will install a base Ubuntu partion as a program inside Windows C:
      Worked alright for me to try out Ubuntu, I stuck with it after that.
    • olik, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2A novice cannot use ubuntu to do what users want to do today. One very clear example. Wireless internet. To make it work, I have to _compile_ ndiswrapper. Strike the word compile from your vocabulary, and make it easy to install proprietary drives and then we'll talk.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"To make it work, I have to _compile_ ndiswrapper."

      No, you don't. Ndiswrapper comes as a pre-compiled package for Ubuntu.
    • whiskeysquared, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@sicarul
      My only point was that Ubuntu feels like the super quality car you have to build yourself. Along with that super car comes the difficulty of finding parts or finding a mechanic that can help you when you're lost.. Windows is the cheaper, less quality Kia sedan. Parts are abundant and every mechanic is familiar with it. Ubuntu *isn't* ready to go right off the disk, unless you want (as a windows user switching over) to force yourself to look over a few niceties that you've grown used to. And sure, Windows may be hard to install (I don't find that it is) and give you less control over how to install it, but perhaps giving *new* users less options to screw up is better in some instances. But the thing is that MOST people never have to install Windows. It comes preconfigured on a new computer. By the time it's riddled with spyware and has become insanely slow, the user gets a new machine that's preconfigured with...Windows. So they're buying the Kia. Now if they could go out and buy the Linux machine preconfigured, and working out of the box, with all the niceties working, I wouldn't have any qualms about recommending Linux as an OS to, say, my mom. But as soon as my mom realized that all her text was distorted, she couldn't use YouTube because the flash player is a little buggy, she didn't have sound because the driver isn't available, she couldn't use her printer or she couldn't use her wireless card...She'd be asking me to install Windows.

      I realize some of these problems are due to manufacturers not building drivers, but it's a compound problem. And no blame should be placed squarely upon the Ubuntu community. But it all adds into the fact that Ubuntu *isnt* a viable alternative to a lot of users. I like it, but I'm also not afraid to say that it does take a lot of tweaking, that the average Windows user wouldn't feel comfortable with, to get it working as a Windows replacement.
    • johnstar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1cuz dos prompt is 1337 right?
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"But as soon as my mom realized that all her text was distorted, she couldn't use YouTube because the flash player is a little buggy, she didn't have sound because the driver isn't available, she couldn't use her printer or she couldn't use her wireless card...She'd be asking me to install Windows."

      That's why there's a LiveCD, to make sure that all hardware works *before* you install it. And, chances are, it will.
  • noseeme, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21The only novelty of this article is that it came from the CBC. Other than that, it's the same old same old.
  • mntbikeracer1, on 10/12/2007, -21/+26I tried linux at my house with my family because so many people were saying some of these distros are easier to use than windows or even mac. Guess what I got a billion questions a day for a month as opposed to a few a week when on windows. Linux may be easy for nerds, admitting I may be a bit of one, but is not nearly a compatible system with the 99% of users that know how a power button and a keyboard work and there ends the extent of their knowledge.
    • haooken, on 10/12/2007, -20/+15This is absolutely true, and none of those experienced with Linux want to admit it. They think that its easy for them it must be easy for everybody. This is simply not the case. Unfortunately, Linux has not been, nor may ever be, "Clueless-User" friendly, which is what a lot of the market is comprised of.

      Which certainly doesn't mean its not powerful and incredibly useful for those who know how to use it. Its a great alternative, if you'd rather not shell out the big bucks for a 'mainstream' OS.

      I'm not hatin'. I'm just pointing out some of the larger picture.
    • mntbikeracer1, on 10/12/2007, -17/+12Not really sure if you are digging me down because you actually have a real counter to my argument or because the fact you linux fanboys are so incredibly wrong is killing your souls.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -19/+9Nah, you're being dugg down because you're just another MS shill spewing BS.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -12/+17"Unfortunately, Linux has not been, nor may ever be, "Clueless-User" friendly"

      Actually, Linux is *very* "clueless user"-friendly. It's Windows Power Users that have a hard time with Windows. Clueless users are not yet used to the quirks of Windows, and to them the Ubuntu UI is simple and straightforward. Tests were conducted with "newbie" users on both Windows, Gnome and KDE, and there were no significant differences in the time it took the test subjects to perform tasks between any of the three desktop environments.

      But don't let that get in the way of good FUD.

      Mmm...I wonder how many paid MS shills are lurking on Digg? Considering that this is a high-traffic site (and the insane amount of pro-Xbox digging), I'd say at least a dozen. And now they will digg me down.
    • mntbikeracer1, on 10/12/2007, -12/+4@archiesteel
      You should really learn to read, "easier to use than windows or even mac." is exactly what I said. I am not an MS junkie or whatever ***** you are blabbering about. I currently use Ubuntu on my laptop, Windows MCE on my desktop in addition to a X360 for the extender and use Macs at work for most of my web design and a few other applications. I know all of the systems thoroughly and I can tell you that people with little computer knowledge find Linux difficult and confusing.
    • whiskeysquared, on 10/12/2007, -7/+12You're getting dugg down because die hard Linux users hate to admit that Linux has problems too. It's not as simple a conversion as most would have you believe. There are a lot of small issues that add up. Before I'm labeled as a MS goon or Apple fan, I'll dispel both immediately. In fact, I WANT Ubuntu to be the answer to all of my problems. Sadly it's not, it just solves some of the problems from Windows and at the same time brings in some fresh ones.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15"You should really learn to read, "easier to use than windows or even mac." is exactly what I said."

      Not really. You said that's what people were saying to you. You never said yourself that you thought Linux was easier to use than Windows or Mac.

      Don't confuse "unfamiliar" with "difficult to use". Someone who's never used a Mac would have just as many questions as if they used Ubuntu (remember, for a fair comparison Linux must be pre-installed and configured, just like Windows or OSX would be on a new PC or Mac). Still, you wouldn't say that OS X is more difficult than Windows, right?

      I've had total Newbies use Linux computers (Mandriva and Kubuntu) and within a matter of minutes they felt at ease. Sure, they had a few questions for me (i.e. "where is that program" or "how do I do this"?) but that's a given - if it was someone who had never used Windows on a Windows PC, they would ask the exact-same-questions.
    • prammy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13@mntbikeracer1:

      People with very little computer experience will find any system daunting. Even more so for people who have very little computer experience and have used only one OS whether it be Windows or MacOS.

      When I got my first job at HP, I was assigned to be the onsite tech support engineer for one of our bigger clients in that city. This was also the time Windows 95 came out. So many people had no idea what to do in Windows 95, and these were not people who just started using computers. They had used Windows 3.x for many many years. Windows 95's interface was alien to them and they were lost. Similarly, when XP came out, people saw the new control panel and got confused again. It was easy enough to setup the classic control panel but that did not help them the first day.

      People can learn to use something new. But many people are scared of using computers because they have a prebuilt notion that it is for the really geeky and they are not smart enough to use it. This is especially true for the people who are in their late 50s to early 60s because when they were young only the really geeky or smart people worked on computers. They have held on to that notion and that prevents them from learning a system easily.

      Linux is not really all that hard to use. It does have its shortcomings though. IMO what linux needs to succeed on the desktop are:
      1. An easy installer for 3rd party applications. Projects like autopackage and Loki installer are available in addition to commercial installers from InstallShield etc.
      2. More ported or equivalent applications. People are creatures of habit. They use Photoshop, they want photoshop. Not Gimp. Not pixel. Not Krita. But Photoshop. OpenOffice is sufficient for most users as is Gimp. The Pros however need Photoshop because Gimp does not support a lot of the higher end functions. However this is a chicken and egg issue, Adobe will port when more linux desktops need Photoshop, More linux desktops will come about when users get their apps ported. Photoshop is the gateway app. Once that gets ported to Linux, many other developers will port theirs. Photoshop on Crossover works well though.
      3. Preinstalled machines. When Mr. Average Joe can go into Best Buy or CompUSA and pick up a preinstalled Linux machine with support, then it becomes easier for Linux to gain marketshare.

      In todays Linux desktop, ease of use is not a problem. I tend to use the CLI because I like it better, but I am not required to do so. I can do 100% of my tasks such as email. browsing, coding etc all without going into the CLI. Gnome and KDE are both easy to use and get used to. I have installed Linux desktops for people and from what I hear, most of them are still using it and are happy with it.
    • mntbikeracer1, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3You guys are missing my point. The learning curve on Mac and Windows is not important because that is what people have become accustomed to. Why would any normal computer user want to switch to Linux? Cost? Doubtful, maybe some will be persuaded by this argument but seeing as many people use pirated Office copies etc... and the rest really don't care about paying for the software this will never bring people over. Linux is great I use it all the time, but most people just have no reason to switch and probably never will. Windows and Mac work, they both have their quirks and may be a bit pricey at times but so are most things in life and people deal with it. It is going to take something very big to get people to switch over, people are not inclined to change.

      @archiesteel

      Can you show me where I said I was "just another MS shill spewing BS."
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7"You guys are missing my point. The learning curve on Mac and Windows is not important because that is what people have become accustomed to."

      Most people are *not* accustomed to Macs. If someone can switch to a Mac, then one can switch to Linux. Gnome and KDE are just as easy to use as the OSX desktop.

      "Can you show me where I said I was "just another MS shill spewing BS.""

      No, no, *I* said that. The use of the prase "Linux fanboy" was the giveaway.

      /Linux and Windows user, computer enthusiast since 1978
    • prammy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@mntbikeracer1:

      "Why would any normal computer user want to switch to Linux? Cost? Doubtful, maybe some will be persuaded by this argument but seeing as many people use pirated Office copies etc."

      People do not switch to Linux for one major reason: Machines do not come preinstalled with it. A good majority of the people who use preinstalled Windows can do just as well with preinstalled Linux. They usually don't even buy from dell.com. They walk into a store like Best Buy and pick up a computer with the stuff that they need preinstalled. If a store like Best Buy (yuck), Circuit City, CompUSA had machines on display with Linux running and knowledgable staff to explain what it is, people will be interested.

      Remember, these same people will buy Vista upgrades for $300 and pay geeksquad to install it for $129 or whatever they are charging now. They don't game, they just use their machines to create documents, some spreadsheets, balance their checkbooks and thats it. If a company can bundle Linux with crossover office, preinstall Quicken etc with crossover office or even have an image cd that can be used to bring the machine back to factory config, then there will be more adoption of a Linux desktop. You could even say that the 2 biggest applications that need to be ported to Linux are a. Photoshop and b. Quicken.

      I have installed Linux for quite a lot of people. They are satisfied with it. It does what they want it to do.
  • levitron, on 10/12/2007, -13/+7I *love* the idea of Ubuntu. I really do. I have no experience, but ordered the 6.06 right away, partitioned my hard drive, and everything works. Everything, that is, but the wireless internet in my Compaq nx9010. It just so happens that this is a very difficult card to get working. (check the forums- *I* can't find an easy solution for a noob.)

    And since we use the internet for a good 80 per cent of our computer-related activities, I haven't booted up in Ubuntu in months.
    • ChrisF79, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Off topic, but why did you buy a Compaq?
    • Haplo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Because Compaq nowadays just buys stuff and assembles? I guess you ask because Compaq computers in the previous century were known to be a bit harder to use with GNU/Linux. I own a Compaq as well, and it has an OEM Asus motherboard, and as far as I know not a single Compaq only component. Ubuntu works.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7"Everything, that is, but the wireless internet in my Compaq nx9010."

      Have you checked Linuxant's Driverloader?

      http://www.linuxant.com/driverloader/?PHPSESSID=802033e39ae6c9651149dc6f3a55fee1

      Works with my Compaq laptop's Wireless Internet.
    • levitron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7"....why'd you by a Compaq?"

      'Cause it was cheap, fairly new, and a laptop. Kinda regretting it now, as it's noisier than most desktop systems...

      "Have you checked Linuxant's Driverloader?"

      I feel like I've checked everything else, but I'm more than willing to give it a shot. Thanks!
    • raisputin3, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4/me plugs ethernet cable into laptop. Result: Lack of internet problem solved.
  • Scatropolis, on 10/12/2007, -6/+16"If looking for a new computer, try Linux"

    That doesn't even make any sense.
    • MrSarcasm, on 10/12/2007, -17/+4In the world of Linux, not many things make sense.
  • nsjoker, on 10/12/2007, -13/+4Good to see my 8 times daily Ubuntu news story has made the front page just in time.
  • LoganSerman, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6Ubuntu is amazing, after you spend hours setting everything up. Took me a good friday afternoon to install everything I wanted, find the right programs, etc.

    I think Linux will be a lot more powerful as a desktop OS once it expands. Once people start developing their software for Linux and it gets to be more main stream, then it will truly boom.
    • jimilarue512, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2I consider myself pretty good with following instructions, I still to this day cannot get my wifi card to work with my machine. I bought 2 of them.
  • robbclark, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Is there support for Airport cards yet?

    Thats the only thing stopping me from installing Ubuntu on my Powerbook.
    • raisputin3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7My Airport (original) card works well on Ubuntu (Feisty)
  • mobilehavoc, on 10/12/2007, -20/+8All these Ubuntu articles are making Linux fanboys seem desperate for people to switch since they have nothing better to do with their shiny Ubuntu installs...

    As a Dapper, Edgy and Feisty user I know the feeling...that's why I use Vista.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Sure, you're a Ubuntu user. I believe you.

      Another shill to add to the list.
  • keef06, on 10/12/2007, -17/+6Linux is slow, painful to setup, it will make you appreciate your old OS more, honestly I'm sick of re-installing it because I didn't do this or that right, I went from ATI to nvidia, to try out Linux and I couldn't even get video going at all, frankly it's too much to setup and too much can go wrong.
  • catylist, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8it is still hard to convert someone who does not think there are any problems with windows that they have been using for years
    • SteveyDevey, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I wholeheartedly agree. Most people that I know aren't concerned with the ease of ubuntu, they just don't have any real reason to switch. But, that does seem to be changing, considering all of the bad press surrounding vista.
    • AmputatedDuck, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Bad press surrounding Vista will simply keep users on XP, not make them switch to Ubuntu.
    • Haplo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6You mean like how all the bad press on IE has scared everybody to Firefox? The thing a lot of GNU/Linux fanboys don't get (which is odd, I explain below) is the harder you call the tools someone uses *****, the less likely it is you can convince the other to check out what you have to offer. Such attacks are regarded as extremely personal.

      Now the odd thing: people who have been using GNU/Linux for a long time will probably agree with me that the fact that GNU/Linux in the beginning was such a pain in the lower back to use didn't keep them away from it. Rather the opposite.
      Ok, maybe it's not odd, a lot of people who have been using GNU/Linux that long don't care anymore if their friends are switching. The zealots are I guess often those people who just found out about GNU/Linux last year and think that they suddenly are a part of a brand new movement.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Most people I know who are interested in trying Linux have been pushed to it by the many, many problems they've experienced with their Windows PCs.

      Let the MS shills mod me down.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5"The thing a lot of GNU/Linux fanboys don't get (which is odd, I explain below) is the harder you call the tools someone uses *****, the less likely it is you can convince the other to check out what you have to offer."

      So what would you say to all the Windows fanboys here calling Linux *****?

      Let me step back a little in case your head asplodes.
  • leo78, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16painless as long as you don't use an ATI graphics card.
    • raisputin3, on 10/12/2007, -9/+1or non-x86 hardware :)
    • astrosmash, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3Free as long as your time has no value.
    • Sicarul, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Actually, if your ATI card is equal to or older than 9250 there are perfectly good open source drivers, they are waaay better than ATI's propietary drivers(fglrx)
  • heavensblade23, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12I'm tired of hearing how "easy" is it to switch to Ubuntu. Difficulty isn't the problem, a lack of desire is.
  • Renork, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I actually just installed Ubuntu today. Everything works but my sound and its really pissing me off. Big time newbie and everything I have read so far hasnt been any help.

    Hopefully Ill get it working 100% in the next day or so. Or its back to Windows for a while.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Do a search on www.ubuntuforums.org

      You might also want to check out www.ubuntuguide.org
    • stoffe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Just for the record, which version did you install? And if you know, what sound card? Sound *was* a big problem for many in earlier releases, including me, but in the later ones it works for almost everyone, that's why I ask. :)
    • dr3d, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4seriously .. look at the replies .. your sound card doesnt work, so its your job to hunt around the forums and figure it all out by yourself .. it's ridiculous to suggest my dad is gonna do this when he can't play a CD or watch a DVD .. "hey Dad go to ubuntuforums and HUNT for an answer"
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"it's ridiculous to suggest my dad is gonna do this when he can't play a CD or watch a DVD"

      Your dad would not have an easier time fixing a non-functioning sound card under Windows. However, the point is moot: the vast majority of sound cards work out-of-the-box with Linux. What's more, you can just try the LiveCD to see if the soundcard is detected and setup correctly. Chances are, it will.
    • Roger, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1"Your dad would not have an easier time fixing a non-functioning sound card under Windows."

      I really doubt that since the card was probably design for Windows. Worse case he could always call the company's tech support.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Yeah, that's if he can figure out what the card is in the first place, then find the Tech Support number. Good luck if it's an obscure card made in Taiwan...

      All of this is pointless, because we're talking about an hypothetical card. Can the OP tell us what the card model is? Most soundcards are supported out-of-the-box, and it's easy to see if it's supported by trying the Live CD.

      Making doomsday predictions about unspecified hardware is textbook FUD.
  • Kimera, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12Adopting Ubuntu: Linux switch can be painless, free

    We know. We're tech savvy people on a tech site.
  • kevptim, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3It works but managing wifi connections is a pain in the ass compared to Windows. That is pretty much my only complaint. That and Beryl not working properly but that's 3rd party and does not really count.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9"It works but managing wifi connections is a pain in the ass compared to Windows."

      I disagree, at least when using Network Manager (with knetworkmanager if you're using Kubuntu). I find it actually better than Windows' built-in wifi manager.
    • shad0walker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Default WiFi management in 6.10 and earlier SUCKS outright, but 7.04 has Network manager built in.
      Got it installed on my laptop right now, after all of 5 mins setup for the wifi card (BCM43xx) the Network manager popped up a nice list of networks for me to connect to.

      Also, the updated BCM43xx drivers in 2.6.20 are working beautifully for me now. Only issue i encountered was a connection drop which was fixed by loading the acerhk module.
  • reed311, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8If switching to Linux is so damn easy then why must there be 20 stories a day about it? Christ, you'd think some of you kids got a royalty check every time someone dropped Windows.
  • alternateheaven, on 10/12/2007, -9/+8Things not said in the article:

    - Your MP3s will not play on install, you have to go out of your way to read up on how to get MP3 support setup correctly

    - Open Office will eat word documents alive in terms of formatting, leaving that nice tables layout you did for your resume in bloody pieces

    - Newer wireless cards using the Atheros chipset will give you a week long headache trying to figure out why they aren't working

    - If you have an iPod (like the entire rest of the living world apparantly) you will be left out in the cold by Apple, sure there are 'alternatives' but they don't live up to the original solution

    The comments that as soon as developers get on board Linux will take off has been made for years and guess what? It still hasn't happened yet. Reason has not been ported over nor has any of the major application suites like Macromedia and Adobe CS. Developers don't get on board for a number of reasons, one of which is the mess of code that is the entire OS as a whole. As was pointed out in other comments on Linux there are different APIs for each desktop environment, so porting applications would take a lot more effort than if there was a unified environment that they could design for.

    I could spend all day listing problems and positives about both Linux and Windows, but given I can find a balance between the two I'm pretty sure most of digg will ignore it anyway...
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11"Your MP3s will not play on install, you have to go out of your way to read up on how to get MP3 support setup correctly"

      Fixed in Feisty

      "Open Office will eat word documents alive in terms of formatting, leaving that nice tables layout you did for your resume in bloody pieces"

      Exaggeration. Most Word docs will come out just fine in OpenOffice 2.0. But if you really need to use MS Office it's trivial to have it running in Linux.

      "Newer wireless cards using the Atheros chipset will give you a week long headache trying to figure out why they aren't working"

      Use Linuxant's Driverloader: http://www.linuxant.com/driverloader/?PHPSESSID=802033e39ae6c9651149dc6f3a55fee1

      "If you have an iPod (like the entire rest of the living world apparantly) you will be left out in the cold by Apple, sure there are 'alternatives' but they don't live up to the original solution"

      Are you kidding? iPod integration in Amarok is excellent. As a iPod user I much prefer it to iTunes (the player). Of course, if you mean that access to the online store is a bit more complicated, you're right. There are workarounds but they're not quite mature. As far as *player* integration with iPod, though, Linux has Windows and OSX beaten hands down.

      "Developers don't get on board for a number of reasons, one of which is the mess of code that is the entire OS as a whole."

      That's a ridiculous assertion: the Linux code is much less of a mess than the Windows one.

      More pro-MS FUD...
    • alternateheaven, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4@ archiesteel

      Fixed in Feisty
      >>Which edition of Feisty, because last I tried any of them they positively refused to even boot in my laptop.

      Use Linuxant's Driverloader: http://www.linuxant.com/driverloader/?PHPSESSID=802033e39ae6c9651149dc6f3a55fee1
      >> A wrapper is not a solution is a band-aid to a problem. I could use that and get so-so half-arsed support (and probably incur a little more overhead) but the smart thing would be for proper drivers to be released.

      Are you kidding? iPod integration in Amarok is excellent. As a iPod user I much prefer it to iTunes (the player). Of course, if you mean that access to the online store is a bit more complicated, you're right. There are workarounds but they're not quite mature. As far as *player* integration with iPod, though, Linux has Windows and OSX beaten hands down.
      >> I'm talking about managing the contents of the iPod, which seems to not be the strong suit of the hand full of iTunes replacement programs I tried, heavens forbid if I actually purchased my music through the iTunes store then I really would have been out of luck, hence what I was getting at.

      "Developers don't get on board for a number of reasons, one of which is the mess of code that is the entire OS as a whole."
      That's a ridiculous assertion: the Linux code is much less of a mess than the Windows one.

      >> Last I checked Gnome, KDE, and XFCE to name only a few of the bigger choices did not use the same API and what ran in Gnome would require some hacking to run under KDE and vice versa. That makes it a headache for developers plain and simple. Ever grepped through the kernel source for a few choice words of profanity? its rife with comments about how this or that is *****, etc. Sure it might not be a technical issue but it still has no place in the code at all. Or how about the "does this belong here" statement that offers nothing of value to a programmer besides the quoted text. How long have coders known about the importance of user input validation and bounds checking yet still Linux suffers from exploits that take advantage of deficiencies in such areas?

      More pro-MS FUD...
      >> Indeed, I must be pro MS because I want Linux to be better than it is now, because I don't give into the fan boy desires to just lavish endless praise on an OS that most definitely has its own faults. This is the exact snap reaction that shows just how damn immature a lot of the pro Linux people can be and it really hurts your cause when you come off to the world as some kind of elitist blinded to the fact that your pet operating system is just as flawed as the alternatives just in different ways. The zealots here never freaking cease to amaze me...
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5"Which edition of Feisty, because last I tried any of them they positively refused to even boot in my laptop."

      Did you try the Alternate Installation CD? Anyway, don't change the subject. Your complaint was about the fact that it's hard to install mp3 support in Ubuntu. My response was that in Feisty it is now automatic. Rather than acknowledge this fact, you change the subject to another complaint, one that cannot be verified by anyone but yourself. Nice try.

      "A wrapper is not a solution is a band-aid to a problem. I could use that and get so-so half-arsed support (and probably incur a little more overhead) but the smart thing would be for proper drivers to be released."

      Driverloader gives perfect support, and with negligible overhead - but it's clear now that no answers from me will satisfy your anti-Linux agenda...

      It's simple: you say something doesn't work, I show you that you're wrong, and then you move the goalposts further away. Typical of pro-MS FUD spreaders...

      "I'm talking about managing the contents of the iPod, which seems to not be the strong suit of the hand full of iTunes replacement programs I tried, heavens forbid if I actually purchased my music through the iTunes store then I really would have been out of luck, hence what I was getting at."

      Managing the iPod's content with Amarok is excellent, and actually better than iTunes because it lets you copy files from the iPod easily. Amarok also has not problems managing songs bought with iTunes (though it won't play them yet, due to DRM issues - however they'll still play on the iPod).

      For people who play mp3s instead of Apple's DRM-infested format, then Amarok is *much* better than iTunes.

      "Last I checked Gnome, KDE, and XFCE to name only a few of the bigger choices did not use the same API and what ran in Gnome would require some hacking to run under KDE and vice versa."

      That is completely false. A Gnome program will run fine in KDE as long as the appropriate libraries are installed, and vice-versa. Since Synaptics will automatically install the required libraries at the same time as the program, this is not an issue. As for commercial developers, they can use static libraries instead.

      "That makes it a headache for developers plain and simple."

      No, it doesn't, and you've proved with your post that you don't really know what you're talking about.

      "Ever grepped through the kernel source for a few choice words of profanity? its rife with comments about how this or that is *****, etc. Sure it might not be a technical issue but it still has no place in the code at all."

      You're grasping at straws, now. Similar profanity was found in the Windows source when some of it was leaked a couple of years ago. Again, nice try but no cigar.

      "Indeed, I must be pro MS because I want Linux to be better than it is now"

      No, you're pro-MS because you repeat outdated FUD and use terms such as "Linux Fanboys".

      "This is the exact snap reaction that shows just how damn immature a lot of the pro Linux people can be and it really hurts your cause when you come off to the world as some kind of elitist blinded to the fact that your pet operating system is just as flawed as the alternatives just in different ways."

      I only snap at MS Fanboys spouting FUD - and frankly, no amount of reasonable talk will sway them away from Redmond. I do not profess that Linux is perfect, but it's certainly not as bad as you and other FUDsters make it out to be.

      "The zealots here never freaking cease to amaze me..."

      In other words, your FUD has been called out, and instead of trying to argue rationally you go for personal attacks. Nice.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Right, like people are really going to believe that someone called "archiesteal" is the real one...

      Hey, kiddo, I've been using this nick for quite a long time, and I've had people pull the same unoriginal trick on me on other websites.

      The only thing you've demonstrated here is your own immaturity.
  • AmputatedDuck, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9I tried switching. I spent 4 hours trying to get my widescreen LCD to run at native resolution with my nvidia card. I spent another 3 hours trying to get my sound card to work. Let's not even mention support for peripherals (such as Netgear SC101) which just don't have drivers for Linux.

    Painless? Not even close.

    Eventually most everything was working - then I realised it was just an OS and most of the stuff I needed to do was using Windows apps anyhow. Now WinXP rules my roost again.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7I installed Ubuntu on a computer just last week. Everything worked out of the box, including sound. Setting up 3D acceleration for the Nvidia card took less than 10 minutes.

      Automatix is your friend (of course, with Feisty this will be even easier, and Automatix will not be needed anymore.)
  • D3koy, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6I used Ubuntu for awhile, but I couldn't get my internet to work and I had a paper research, so I switched back and I haven't tried since...

    I'd try it again, but I'm really busy...
  • john2kx, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I'd install it, but there's no linux driver for my internal wireless card on my laptop.. Without internet access, it would be completely useless to me.

    Still, I admire what they're trying to do with linux.. something I think should have been done long ago.
  • Drisler, on 10/12/2007, -14/+3The linux fanboi's are strong with this one.
    • AbstractEgo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8>>5840886
      Buried For Use Of "boi".

      Really, Stop That.
  • elitexero, on 10/12/2007, -9/+8Hurrah for the 523,242,424,424,001th story about switching to Ubuntu on the front page of Digg
    • atdigg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11You don't know how Digg works, do you?
  • raisputin3, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3While I think Linux is a decent kernel and the resulting distributions that are created around the Linux kernel with GNU software are good, as a whole GNU/Linux it has a ways to go and the same goes for the various BSD's

    1) My biggest problem with Linux/BSD right now is lack of support for NON-x86 hardware. Sure, I *could* go learn C/C++ or whatever I need to so that I could make libBillyBob work on my NON-x86 hardware (be in Sun/Apple/SGI or whatever), but I shouldn't *have* to be able to do that. To be fair, in general I don't have to do this, and sometimes I WISH that I knew how.

    2) Flash. The WWW is filled with FLASH animations. Again if you are using NON-x86 hardware, there is no decent flash player that will play the latest flash content. Yes, I already signed the online petition to get Flash for Linux on PPC hardware, but again, if I am not running Linux, but BSD, it is again broken

    3) I have to say that Ubuntu on my venerable G3/500 Pismo Powerbook has been pretty nice. The wireless seems to just work most of the time, meaning that I can usually connect to any available wireless without issue. I have had to install a couple other programs to get it to be consistent though (KWiFiManger and I don't remember the others off the top of my head) which is funny since I am using GNOME. Kismet on the other hand is a freaking nightmare on my original Airport Card. It makes ZERO sense why my wireless networking works flawlessly with whatever is built-in to the distro, but Kismet (installed from Synaptec Package Manager) should require me to figure out which driver I am using and then once I figure it out, it doesn't work still. Ridiculous

    4) Without full support from Adobe (Photoshop, etc.) and Microsoft (Office), Intui (TurboTax), Apple (iTunes) at a minimum, I don't see Linux making much headway on the desktop anytime soon. I only listed things that were important to ME, obviously everybody's needs are different. As for games, while WINE works on x86 machines, what about non-x86 machines. Linux needs big game companies to make native games for Linux.

    Linux works pretty well, for the geekier amongst us, and even for some people that have at least some technical knowledge. It is not ready for general use yet however, though it is making leaps and bounds in that direction.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7"My biggest problem with Linux/BSD right now is lack of support for NON-x86 hardware."

      As compared to Windows' support for non-x86 hardware?
    • generalloy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Flash, of course blame Adobe, but you could always install 32 bit Firefox and Flash.

      Otherwise, try swfdec, it's open source and will run on any architecture including 64 bits. It plays Youtube! (tm) http://swfdec.freedesktop.org/
    • raisputin3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@archiesteel
      "As compared to Windows' support for non-x86 hardware?"

      Umm..I don't use Windows if I can help it :)
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Okay...usually when someone identifies a problem with an OS, it's because some other OS has it solved, but I understand your point now.

      Yes, it is true that non-x86 support is sometimes lacking, but it is usually better than for other OSes.
    • raisputin3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@generalloy
      I think I have swfdec installed on my ubuntu laptop (Powerbook G3/500) and it doesn't work so well, however, I am willing to give the new version a shot. Thanks for the info :)
    • andycr512, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"4) Without full support from Adobe (Photoshop, etc.) and Microsoft (Office), Intui (TurboTax), Apple (iTunes) at a minimum, I don't see Linux making much headway on the desktop anytime soon."

      We have programs that are in some cases even better than those that you listed. A few examples offhand are Gimp, OpenOffice, (no tax software good enough to replace turbotax for some reason), and Amarok/Banshee. Personally, I really don't WANT those applications on GNU/Linux - not libre? I'm about 100 times less likely to use it. A good percentage, if not most, GNU/Linux users who are into it philosophically agree.

      Besides, why do we need freedom-removing programs like that when there are perfectly viable replacements in most cases, and the other cases can usually be fixed with Wine?

      "Linux needs big game companies to make native games for Linux."

      Epic and iD make native games. More should follow.
    • raisputin3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Tried the newest version of swfdec from the website. Had to install a ton of other stuff, but that was OK...Installed all the ALSA stuff and everything else I needed and then was ready to compile and install swfdec.

      It of course failed. So, no flash for Ubuntu on non-x86 :(
    • raisputin3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@andycr512
      you wrote:
      "We have programs that are in some cases even better than those that you listed. A few examples offhand are Gimp, OpenOffice, (no tax software good enough to replace turbotax for some reason), and Amarok/Banshee. Personally, I really don't WANT those applications on GNU/Linux - not libre? I'm about 100 times less likely to use it. A good percentage, if not most, GNU/Linux users who are into it philosophically agree.

      Besides, why do we need freedom-removing programs like that when there are perfectly viable replacements in most cases, and the other cases can usually be fixed with Wine?"

      GIMP != Photoshop, sorry, but it doesn't even compare. OpenOffice !=Microsoft Office, while it compares better to MS Office than does GIMP to Photoshop, they are again not on the same level for business purposes, and, their is no *real* support other than community support, which, for any technician that works supporting users that use these applications, is critical because there will come a time when something goes terribly wrong and needs to be fixed FAST, sorry, 9 times out of 10, the individual program support forums can't accomplish that. There is nothing like being able to get on the phone to support when needed, even if it is a rare occurance. Again, Amarok/Banshee != iTunes.

      You mention fixing other things with WINE, well, sorry, but to the best of *MY* knowledge, WINE does not work on non-x86 platforms, which of course means that running a program in WINE is not a viable alternative.

      As an IT professional I use multiple architectures for different purposes. Anything that will only run on x86 and not the other architectures that we use does not make sense.
    • andycr512, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"GIMP != Photoshop, sorry, but it doesn't even compare. OpenOffice !=Microsoft Office, while it compares better to MS Office than does GIMP to Photoshop, they are again not on the same level for business purposes,"

      Yes, they are not as good features wise - but they are close, and are also interchangeable with the programs you mentioned. Also, they are free, in both senses.

      "and, their is no *real* support other than community support,"

      Yes, there is. You can pay to have "real" support. That's what you do with commercial software - support is part of the price. You can't expect someone on a phone 24/7 for free.

      "which, for any technician that works supporting users that use these applications, is critical because there will come a time when something goes terribly wrong and needs to be fixed FAST, sorry, 9 times out of 10, the individual program support forums can't accomplish that. There is nothing like being able to get on the phone to support when needed, even if it is a rare occurance."

      Again, paid support is available, and it is better than the support with proprietary software. Heck, the commercial support can even change the software to meet your needs!

      "Again, Amarok/Banshee != iTunes."

      Again, iTunes != Libre.

      "You mention fixing other things with WINE, well, sorry, but to the best of *MY* knowledge, WINE does not work on non-x86 platforms, which of course means that running a program in WINE is not a viable alternative.

      As an IT professional I use multiple architectures for different purposes. Anything that will only run on x86 and not the other architectures that we use does not make sense."

      How well does Windows, Photoshop, iTunes, etc work on those weird platforms you use? Obviously not at all, unless you are referring to PPC...
  • thehoodie, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3My motherboard fried as soon as I installed ubuntu...
    • lowerlogic, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3That sucks, what type of cpu, model of motherboard, and version of ubuntu caused this?
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10I think it's the imaginary version of Ubuntu, installed on the made-up motherboard that features the new BS chip.
    • lucianolev, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Yeah.. And after installing Windows my mother died...
    • thehoodie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Who said it was a bad thing, I get a new computer now and I'm installing Ubuntu on that one too!
  • adambard, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4There are two types of users who can benefit from installing Linux.

    Group number 1 is the clueless computer-user. A child, your grandma, anyone that's going to be floundering regardless of their OS. This comes with the caveat that you install the system for them. In this case Ubuntu may actually be easier, thanks to the graphical repository system, add programs menu, etc. They're not likely to upgrade their system, and they *are* likely to click on a link to install FREE! new smileys, in which case they will enjoy the benefits of not ending up with a metric bucketload of malware.

    Group number 2 are us too-computer-savvy nerd types, who can overcome the technical problems associated with switching, and think Beryl is totally sweet. Not much needs to be said of us.

    The vast majority of computer users, however, are the third type: the kind who have been using Windows for years without caring what's going under the hood, and are happy paying Norton to keep their computer safe, and Valve to provide them with games. There's no reason for my dad, for instance, to start using Linux, except possibly so I can set the root password to something he doesn't know so he won't call me up to help him fix the wireless internet because he suddenly got on some weird security kick and installed a bunch of software that proceeded to mess everything up.

    ANYHOW... I love Ubuntu. I use it at work, with Beryl and all those delights, and I make my Vista-using boss jealous. But for most of the populous, switching just isn't worth it. The solution is to get Ubuntu for your kids and grandma, so that in ten or twenty years you'll have a bunch of Linux users for whom switching to Windows just isn't worth the effort.
    • imfm, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Yes! Linux is perfect for a clueless user; once everything is set up for them and they know how to find email, web browser, their pictures and their music, they're golden and don't know (or care) what operating system they're using (and I don't have to deal with the latest, "my computer is running slow, but I didn't do anything" call...yay). Linux is perfect for geeks, too, because geeks care what goes on under the hood and aren't afraid of using a terminal or editing config files if that's what it takes to do what they want. Linux is not perfect for those who are content with Windows, for most gamers, or for people who are Windows power users and are reluctant to start over at square one, knowing nothing and having to hunt for the equivalent of "My Documents". Linux pisses Windows power users off because they're accustomed to knowing how to do things, but with a new OS, they're rank beginners. I know--I was a Windows power user and it took a while before simple Linux tasks didn't frustrate me at every turn. Just like when I learned Windows. :)
  • lowerlogic, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6My Ubuntu Linux Will Dominate Your Computer
  • jimilarue512, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5@ Everyone who just gave me a link to install wireless drivers.

    Been there done that....but you actually think a average user could do any of those? I think not.

    Give up, its just not average user friendly.

    Most people prefer to watch a movie, listen to some songs or have sex instead of spending 10 hours a week configuring and installing new ***** on ubuntu.

    Nuff said.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5I guess you're replying to me...did you even try to use Linuxant's driverloader? We're not talking about the "average user" here, we're talking about you. Did you try it? It's extremely easy and straightforward if you use a current distro (such as Edgy).

      It takes 5 minutes to setup, not 10 hours.

      I don't really think you're interested in solving your problem. I think you have a clear anti-Linux agenda, and that you're using this issue to spread your FUD. In other words, Yet Another MS Fanboy.

      Most people prefer to watch a movie, listen to some songs or have sex instead of fixing their broken Windows PC for the twenty-seventh time. I should know, I'm a Windows "family and friends" Tech Support guy.
    • generalloy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7it's one card; I'm sure if I were in your position, I would agree and say it's not user friendly either. But lots of people's cards DO work, and they work by default, and the situation will be much better with Feisty's new wireless stack (which has been in the works for years); who knows, your card might even work if it's Broadcom based.

      So, it seems like your problem is the device manufacturer not supporting Linux; that is a problem, but just remember that you seem to be saying Linux is not userfriendly because one device won't work. Even Vista has device driver probs..
  • pabster, on 10/12/2007, -8/+6STFU with your "Free" nonsense.

    Linux is NOT free. The cost of support and/or training is far more than a copy of Windows.

    Of course the geeks here don't mind spending hours and hours supporting someone as they try to figure out the most mundane things in Linux, but my time is worth money.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6"Linux is NOT free. The cost of support and/or training is far more than a copy of Windows."

      Actually, it's not. Linux requires much less maintenance than Malware-vulnerable Windows. Most of my support time is spent helping people with their broken Windows install, not fixing my Linux PCs (which have been working flawlessly for months, even years in the case of my desktop, and that after two OS upgrades).

      Please stop spreading FUD.
    • alternateheaven, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3@ archiesteel

      If you have to spend so much time supporting friends and family obviously your windows-fu is not that strong because a ounce of prevention goes miles when applied properly in Windows. Every computer I work on for friends and family gets a default load of Win XP SP 2, AVG, Firefox, and Spybot and guess what? No infections in months! The fact of the matter is that in fact YOU are the fan boy and FUD spreader because you refuse to believe anything positive about Windows, which makes you just as stupid as those who reverse the rolls and wont acknowledge positive aspects about say Linux or OSX.
    • voyvf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Of course it's free. It's free for anyone to install, run, and learn it in their own spare time.

      That's why I try *not* to push it on other people - if they don't have enough initiative to try it out, they'll likely not have the initiative to learn it on their own, sans hand-holding. While I never mind helping a person out, I do understand having better things to do than be Captain Tech-support 24/7.

      Of course, those not willing to learn something new in their spare time generally have bigger issues than an unruly OS. :D
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"If you have to spend so much time supporting friends and family obviously your windows-fu is not that strong because a ounce of prevention goes miles when applied properly in Windows. Every computer I work on for friends and family gets a default load of Win XP SP 2, AVG, Firefox, and Spybot and guess what? No infections in months!"

      Forgetting for a second the fact that you *don't* have to do all this to keep a Linux PC secure, malware is not the only cause of performance degradation or bugs on a Windows PC. People break their Windows boxes in a variety of ways, and don't underestimate the creative ways in which users can do that.

      "The fact of the matter is that in fact YOU are the fan boy and FUD spreader because you refuse to believe anything positive about Windows,"

      This is completely false. I use Windows daily and I think it's a good OS despite its obvious security problems. What do you have to say to that, boy?

      "which makes you just as stupid as those who reverse the rolls and wont acknowledge positive aspects about say Linux or OSX."

      Personal attacks and insults won't make your lack of argument any less noticeable.
    • godd4242, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4@Pabster.

      ***** kill yourself.
      You're a stuckup dick and a ***** republican.

      GTFO my already damaged country, don't need your ***** christian values ***** ***** up more.

      RIGHT BACK ON TOPIC.

      No it's not.
      You send me your pc, I'll throw Edgy onto it for you, videotape it, and the vid will be small enough to post onto youtube, cause it'll take no time.
      I'll transfer all your old media and the like too, if you want me to.
      Still will take me ~1 hour maybe 1 and 1/2
    • raisputin3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Actually, Linux *IS* free, but you are correct in that training costs money.

      Because you mention training, I can assume that you are speaking of a business environment. Support on the other hand is no worse than supporting anything else, provided that someone is using a distribution such as Ubuntu, or the tech staff is properly hired and trained to support Linux.

      The one place I will agree with you though on support, is that until their are call centers, like you have with the other 2 major Operating Systems (MacOS and Windows), the support is lacking for a "normal" user. The GUI tools in Linux for general tasks such as network setup, email, and web however, are every bit as intuitive as Windows. I wouldn't quite compare them to MacOS yet as far as ease of use, but they easily compare to Windows. In fact, some are even easier.

      My time is worth money as well, in fact quite a bit of money, but I can tell you that I would rather have 1 crashed Linux system in my business than 100 down Windows systems because of Viruses/Spyware, and yes, I am being serious, out of all the operating systems that I support, given 3 offices of equal size, each one running only MacOS X, Linux or Windows and no combination of the aforementioned Operating Systems, I will get the most requests from a Windows-based office every time.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"out of all the operating systems that I support, given 3 offices of equal size, each one running only MacOS X, Linux or Windows and no combination of the aforementioned Operating Systems, I will get the most requests from a Windows-based office every time."

      This is consistent with most of what I've heard from IT support guys.
    • alternateheaven, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@ archiesteel

      Congratulations on actually admitting something good about Windows and that you use it, I would similarly like to admit fully that I interact with Linux servers on an almost daily basis (uploading code not maintaining thankfully) perhaps I had you figured wrong after all...

      @ godd4242

      Wtf is with the flying off the handle and especially the irony of giving someone ***** about being Christian when you yourself have an apparantly relgion-derived name? Deep breaths now...
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I'm sorry, but in your immature nickname-stealing shenanigans I believe you are using a copyrighted image (my avatar) without permission. Please stop, or I will have to notify the Digg administrators. (It's bad enough that you feel the only way you can make a point is by impersonating someone else, if you're going to break the law I'm going to have to call you on it.)
    • alternateheaven, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@ archiesteal

      I'm not sure if your implying that I'm the one doing the stupid name trick but I can assure you I'm not; I might be willing to sling plenty of mud over the great Linux/Windows debate (cause quite frankly its fun and invigorating) but I'm not some wank who would go that low. Besides no matter how into debate/flame/argument I get I'm not going to waste the time to create yet another account here on digg to poke and prod at someone I don't even know when its far easier to just use the one i have now :p

      edit: wow i need to pay alot more attention I didn't realize that the condescending post you made was not actually made by you, goes to show what 12 hour night shifts do to the brain.
    • andycr512, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"but my time is worth money."

      In that case, who is paying you to write this post?
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4alternateheaven, I wasn't talking to you, but to the person who created a user called "archiesteal" in an attempt to confuse others. I am not implying that you're the name stealer at all. We may disagree, but that's fine. I don't expect everyone to agree with me.
  • palex19, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3ubuntu 6.10 plus automatix2 is a system that can replace windows xp for about 70% of computer users. just about everything works right from the start.
    -------------
    the count
  • skatterbrainz, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5Still too many apps only available for Windows for me to consider it beyond a testing platform. I can't afford to switch over to it at work, it would be industrial suicide.
    • godd4242, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4Dual boot if you like.
      Use WINE if you like.
      Use parallels if you like.

      And honestly, what app(s) is so vital that you can't use a FOSS replacement?
  • ordminute, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The switch to Ubuntu was pretty smooth for this OS X user. The best thing about the article is that the author pushes the "try before you buy" LiveCD option which is what tipped me toward installing it.

    Without it I would've never taken the risk.



  • splitfyre, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I would switch to Ubuntu but I use the Adobe suite of products religiously.Curious to see if Adobe support Ubuntu.. hmmm...
  • MrTea, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Ubuntu receives too much credit
  • tokyopimp, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I love it that even if people have reasonable complaints about Ubuntu every single one of them is getting dugg down.

    It's no wonder I have my setting to show all comments including buried ones, because of the massive amount of Linux fan boys digging people down with even the mention of something negative about precious Ubuntu.

    I installed Ubuntu on my brothers PC, I figured his hardware is older all the drivers should be there, and everything should run fine. WRONG... his Linksys wireless card was not supported at all this card is 3 years old and is/was a popular card, so I spent 2 hours trying to get it working with a bunch of workarounds and crap by looking through forums, couldn't get it working. Right back to Windows XP I went.

    Now carefully building a computer and setting it up where you know it's all supported in Ubuntu... fine. But what happens when my brother buys a webcam, and it doesn't work? I have to spend a couple hours looking for a fix, learning terminal commands to install this fix... etc etc. It's *****

    Linux still has a ways to go before I would give it to a family member to switch from windows. My mother bought a laptop, never even used a computer really. I put anti-virus, anti-spyware, and zone alarm on it. Zero viruses, and no problems going on two years now. Don't tell me that Windows isn't secure for people who don't know anything about computers, because if you just set it up right they will be fine.
    • andycr512, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4"I love it that even if people have reasonable complaints about Ubuntu every single one of them is getting dugg down."

      Most got dugg down because their problem could have been solved with a little research.

      "It's no wonder I have my setting to show all comments including buried ones, because of the massive amount of Linux fan boys digging people down with even the mention of something negative about precious Ubuntu."

      Not even going to touch that one. Silence speaks for me.

      "I installed Ubuntu on my brothers PC, I figured his hardware is older all the drivers should be there, and everything should run fine. WRONG... his Linksys wireless card was not supported at all this card is 3 years old and is/was a popular card, so I spent 2 hours trying to get it working with a bunch of workarounds and crap by looking through forums, couldn't get it working."

      *cough* ndiswrapper would have gotten it working in about 5 minutes *cough*

      Though I have had issues with ndiswrapper on Ubuntu. I don't know how, but they messed it up. It's fine on most distros.

      "Right back to Windows XP I went."

      I used to do that, about 4 years ago. I would use GNU/Linux for awhile, then get discouraged because something wouldn't work. Know what I discovered? 99% of the time it was merely that I did not know enough about the OS to get it working properly.

      After awhile of bouncing, I have settles on GNU/Linux and am very happy. If you have an interest, you will learn, and eventually, if you prefer it, settle on GNU/Linux - and find it isn't as hard as you thought.

      "learning terminal commands to install this fix... etc etc. It's *****"

      It's the way the system is. Terminal is to GNU/Linux as GUI configuration tools are to Windows. The terminal isn't this big scary bad thing that takes forever to learn. The console is here to stay. Learn to love it, and you WILL love it, trust me.

      "Linux still has a ways to go before I would give it to a family member to switch from windows. My mother bought a laptop, never even used a computer really. I put anti-virus, anti-spyware, and zone alarm on it. Zero viruses, and no problems going on two years now. Don't tell me that Windows isn't secure for people who don't know anything about computers, because if you just set it up right they will be fine."

      "Set it up right" means "no internet access". With internet access and Windows, you are playing Russian Roulette - the only difference is that you can increase how many chambers there are with security utilities. All it takes is one bad attachment that slips past AV... Sure, tools can improve the solution, but Windows is not secure by design like GNU/Linux is.
    • tokyopimp, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2"Most got dugg down because their problem could have been solved with a little research."

      No, most get dugg down because they said something negative about Ubuntu, nothing more nothing less.

      "*cough* ndiswrapper would have gotten it working in about 5 minutes *cough*"

      Yeah, that's the kind of smug attitude fan boys have, by inserting "coughs" in between a comment, you show exactly why people hate fanboys.

      "I used to do that, about 4 years ago. I would use GNU/Linux for awhile, then get discouraged because something wouldn't work. Know what I discovered? 99% of the time it was merely that I did not know enough about the OS to get it working properly.

      After awhile of bouncing, I have settles on GNU/Linux and am very happy. If you have an interest, you will learn, and eventually, if you prefer it, settle on GNU/Linux - and find it isn't as hard as you thought."

      Guess what, in Mac OSX and Windows... I don't have to read through forums, because when I install software or hardware it 99 percent of the time works. You're proving my point, you're saying that it takes an interest to learn and use linux to it's full extent. Now this works for nerds, but it doesn't work for the fast majority of computer users who want something that is simple and works. That's why Windows and to a lesser extent OSX will continue to have the market locked.

      "It's the way the system is. Terminal is to GNU/Linux as GUI configuration tools are to Windows. The terminal isn't this big scary bad thing that takes forever to learn. The console is here to stay. Learn to love it, and you WILL love it, trust me."

      Again proving my point, the average user isn't going to go into a terminal, search online for the commands and try to figure out how to install lets say a driver. I remember trying to get some version of linux to display at my native resolution, I downloaded the drivers then read a tutorial on how to install them. To me that's ridiculous, and why Linux is for hardcore users only. Sorry, but I much prefer a GUI interface just like the rest of the world. You here fanboys telling you how great linux is, you install it. Then when you try to install a driver you have to go into a terminal and type commands in. This is suppose to be so great, yet most of the software doesn't have GUI installers that Windows has had for over a decade. So when my brother, who is not going to look up how to do this, downloads something and calls me asking "How in the hell do I install this" I have to go online, go onto a forum and find out how. That's lovely, that's really something the average computer user is looking forward to.

      ""Set it up right" means "no internet access". With internet access and Windows, you are playing Russian Roulette - the only difference is that you can increase how many chambers there are with security utilities. All it takes is one bad attachment that slips past AV... Sure, tools can improve the solution, but Windows is not secure by design like GNU/Linux is."

      Right, well there are 4 n00b computer users in my household with their own computers online running Windows XP, and they have zero viruses, they never bug me that something is wrong, and that's because I installed Windows and set it up properly.






    • amphoterous, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3@ andycr512

      The point is, that even though these problems could be "solved" with a little research, it is that extra step that prevents many people from switching. Generally, people want to install something and just have it work.
    • andycr512, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"No, most get dugg down because they said something negative about Ubuntu, nothing more nothing less."

      You are right - however, the fact still stands that most of the problems could have been solved with a little research.

      "Yeah, that's the kind of smug attitude fan boys have, by inserting "coughs" in between a comment, you show exactly why people hate fanboys."

      For something so obvious, how could I not wish to highlight it?

      "Guess what, in Mac OSX and Windows... I don't have to read through forums, because when I install software or hardware it 99 percent of the time works."

      Yes, but most people do not know how to install drivers on ANY OS.

      "You're proving my point, you're saying that it takes an interest to learn and use linux to it's full extent."

      No kidding! The same is true of any OS!! Did you just magically know how to use Windows to its fullest extent out of the box the first time you used it?

      "Again proving my point, the average user isn't going to go into a terminal, search online for the commands and try to figure out how to install lets say a driver."

      The same could be said of Windows; as I said, the only difference is that GNU/Linux depends more on the console than Windows. As I also said, the console is easy to use. It's easier to copy and paste commands from a page than to try to follow steps through a GUI.

      "I remember trying to get some version of linux to display at my native resolution, I downloaded the drivers then read a tutorial on how to install them. To me that's ridiculous, and why Linux is for hardcore users only."

      So Windows detected your video card automatically and knew what resolution to use for your monitor? Interesting. What kind of video card do you have? Surely not ATi or nVidia... However, I will say that X configuration is one of the less user friendly aspects of a GNU/Linux system at the moment, but that is being fixed as we speak.

      "Sorry, but I much prefer a GUI interface just like the rest of the world."

      We HAVE a GUI interface. Many, in fact.

      "You here fanboys telling you how great linux is, you install it. Then when you try to install a driver you have to go into a terminal and type commands in."

      Yeah, that's generally how it works. :)

      "This is suppose to be so great, yet most of the software doesn't have GUI installers that Windows has had for over a decade."

      You make it sound like a GUI for specific tasks is a matter of how advanced an OS is. It's not. The terminal is here to stay. Learn to love it, or use Windows and OSX.

      "So when my brother, who is not going to look up how to do this, downloads something and calls me asking "How in the hell do I install this" I have to go online, go onto a forum and find out how. That's lovely, that's really something the average computer user is looking forward to."

      Funny, you just described Windows. With Ubuntu, you can simply show him "You don't have to download any software, just click Programs, Add (forgot the exact wording), check the boxes next to the software you want and click install." This is harder than Windows?!

      "Right, well there are 4 n00b computer users in my household with their own computers online running Windows XP, and they have zero viruses, they never bug me that something is wrong, and that's because I installed Windows and set it up properly."

      1. How do you know they don't have any viruses? The computer wouldn't exactly scream "I have a virus!!!" and the virus could "remove the teeth" of the AV software...
      2. Why take the risk at all? They WILL get one at some point.
  • Reno582, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3I'm still getting dependency problems especially with drivers,
  • Leomarth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Anyone know what day Fiesty Fawn is coming out?
  • kevinchai, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Go Kubuntu!
  • digitallysick, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I will admit, i don't think linux is fully ready for the internet noob. I would say its more for pc users of at least a few years. Ubuntu is really closing in on the "easy to use" gap , i found almost everything i needed in "add/remove"
  • Cherubim, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2As a "long tie computer user" this idiot doesn't seem to realise that "Linux" itself is a *kernel*, not an OS. It's GNU/Linux that makes up the Operating System - a combination of kernel and open source components.

  • culebra, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4One of the lamest articles ever posted on digg.
  • scrambled, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I will switch to Ubuntu once:

    1. There's some kind of Xbox 360 media compatibility (pictures, music, wmv's)
    2. I can sync music AND videos to my 5G iPod
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4If those are the only two things keeping you on Windows, why don't you just run it in a virtual machine?
    • amphoterous, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Because it's a pain in the ass.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2No it's not.
  • NessTheHero, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4I wouldn't say painless.

    I was so confused by Linux's partition thingy and it's cryptic error messages that I accidentally wiped a 200 gigabyte hard drive with all the stuff I had downloaded over about 3 years. It really pissed me off, so I didn't install it.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I'm sorry, I find that hard to believe.
  • franco313, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2where can i get a ubuntu distro with beryl and wine already installed know if someone can get that more people will switch
  • yourbrokenoven, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3i've tried for years to find a distro of linux that was easy to switch to, but i keep coming up with problems. most of the time linux won't support either ATI or NVIDIA graphics cards and i can never figure out why. the programs bundled with the distros don't function half the time (especially the ones that edit the GUI options so you don't have to use the command line editer) and so on.

    i'll admit that i haven't tried ubuntu, and maybe i'll get around to it one day, but i don't understand the hype around linux other than the fact that it's free. sure it's free, but if a smart eager-to-learn person can't figure it out and all the help he gets is "do a search" or "read the manuals" then i guess i'm stuck with windows. at least it's easy to operate...

    once linux finally figures out how to make the operating system USER friendly, nobody will think twice about switching.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"sure it's free, but if a smart eager-to-learn person can't figure it out "

      That's the thing: a smart eager-to-learn person *can* figure it out. What does this tell you?

      Having ATI/Nvidia supported with Linux is very easy. For Ubuntu, just check www.ubuntuguide.org (or run Automatix). It will be even easier in Feisty Fawn.
  • amphoterous, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5"Adopting Ubuntu: Linux switch can be painless, free"

    Key word is *can.* Until you you spend hours searching for why your sound drivers don't work. And then spend another hour downloading and compiling drivers. Not to mention all the joys of dealing with an ATI graphics card.

    Personally, I think it's worth waiting a couple years until Ubuntu matures, unless you are really willing to put the time and effort into switching.
    • archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"Personally, I think it's worth waiting a couple years until Ubuntu matures"

      Or install Feisty Fawn, which will automatically install your Nvidia/Ati drivers.

      As for sound cards, honestly, it's been a while since I've seen one that doesn't work. Can you name that mythical soundcard, or are you mindlessly repeating FUD without checking its veracity?
    • whiskeysquared, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1With you amphoterous, the first windows machine I ever touched had windows 3.1 or something like that installed. It worked. Now, I think microsoft is an evil overlord just as much as the next guy, but (in my experience) the basic system just worked. Ubuntu requires hours of endless forum conversations to get anything set correctly. archiesteel is a linux preacher or something. Yes, if you're lucky enough to have a system that has hardware that's supported completely by Ubuntu, it may go flawlessly. But if you're like a lot of people who are just trying this "new linux thing" for the first time on an old machine, you're bound to have issues. Ubuntu and Linux is not the answer to all problems. Plan to devote a sizable amount of time trying to tweak it to get it running. Also plan on going outside your comfort zone with command lines as that's the answer to most problems with linux (and another issue I say, by default makes it inaccessible to novice computer users).

      On the latest machine I put Ubuntu on, Firefox (of all things) came to a screeching halt. All the fonts looked like sandblasted ass. The flash player was worthless. Load times were equally as long as XP on the same box. I'm sure I'll discover more. But if you bring up issues with Ubuntu, the linux deathsquad will immediately tell you to STFU and go back to windows if Linux is too hard for you. Which makes no sense at all if Ubuntu is supposed to be the OS that will kill Windows (which is implied). It definitely needs a little more time to mature. At this point, it's over hyped.
  • michaelpe2051, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2i used linux for several years. i liked it ok. the administrator(me) could tweak and do all kinds of things. fast forward to 2007. vista! what a crippled piece of excrement! i tried replacing some dll's in the windowssystem32 directory. "access denied" it responded. i dual boot with nt4 sp6 and when i tried to copy the repalcement dll's from nt. it also said "access denied"! vista was denying me access to my own system! i did some reading on the subject and learned it was actually something called windows resource protection(wrp) that was preventing me from copying the newer files into the system32 directory. excuse me? but doesn't not having the ability manage vista make it (vista) totaly useless?
    i don't use linux anymore but, i could do anything i wanted to do to it. sad you can't do that with vista. the last good OS that microsoft made was windows server 2003. but, even in the windows community you don't hear much about it. if WRP is the technology included with vista and vienna and beyond. no thanks!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 60 of 60 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.