What is Digg?611 Comments
- Shootfast, on 07/23/2008, -8/+227To be fair, XP is almost 7 years old. And Vista is very easy to install comparatively. Linux will install very well on most systems, but if the device you need isn't detected properly or there isn't a compatible driver, Linux will come down just as hard.
- angrykeyboarder, on 07/22/2008, -33/+153Nope. I never thought that actually. :)
Having recently installed several Linux distros, Windows XP and Windows Vista I'll give you my ranking (#1 being the easiest).
#1 Most any major Linux distro (e.g. Ubuntu, Mandriva, openSUSE).
#2 Windows Vista
#3 Windows XP.
Considering all the software that comes with a Linux distro you I should have put XP & Vista at numbers 9 and 10 (leaving 2-8 blank). - spammishking, on 07/23/2008, -22/+126I'll give you the fact that Linux is easier to install (depending on the distro) but getting it to work is another story. I've been trying to set up a FTP server and I have to go through 20 pages of instruction as well as doing some line editing with the Vi editor. Or I just download a simple app for Windows that takes 2 minutes.
As much as I hate to say it Linux needs to be dumbed down a little. As smart as I think I am, I am often proven an idiot by trying to get the simplest programs to work properly in Linux, which are nearly automatically installed by Windows. - JasonCox, on 07/23/2008, -14/+111BREAKING: Current Linux distros are easier to install than a 7 year old operating system
- fluxboxuk, on 07/23/2008, -8/+98Installing Linux is one thing, getting it to do everything you want it to do is another !!!!
- smedrick, on 07/23/2008, -5/+85This is a Linux vs. Windows argument...you're not allowed to be fair.
- Ademan, on 07/23/2008, -12/+62sudo apt-get install gproftpd
run the GUI app, and you're *done*, heck, ubuntu comes with a default config that's easily adaptable, AND you know there are more command line editors than just vi right? Like nano?... Most tutorials suggest the use of nano not vi anyways...
9 times out of 10 if linux is being too hard, you're doing it wrong. I'm not even saying it's your fault, linux tends to work very differently than windows. (I can't even describe how wrong i had things the first time i tried it...) That's why interactive help with people who have already learned "the linux way" is really important, because otherwise you'll just continue to butt your head up against the problem "the windows way" and that just leads to sour experiences. - EnderMB, on 07/23/2008, -14/+64Seriously, who gives a flying *****?
There may be Linux distro's that are easier to install than XP, but XP is pretty damn easy to install at the worst of times. It's almost like saying that you're the best in the world at breathing. Well done Linux, now go do something remotely interesting that might actually entice users from Windows, perhaps some innovative applications or a fantastic GUI.
This article is just your typical run-of-the-mill Microsoft bitch-fest that people will Digg because they've never used Vista but want everyone to hate it as much as they do. - DontThinkSo, on 07/23/2008, -19/+57I just got finished with the most frustrating XP install I've ever done. XP didn't include the drivers for the ethernet card, video card, or multimedia controller. Worse yet, I couldn't find any way to determine what was actually *in* the PC from Windows! After tons of searching, I finally just put in an Ubuntu livecd, used lspci, and got a nice easy list of all of the hardware components, and downloaded the components, placed them on a flash drive, rebooted and installed the drivers. I never did find drivers for the Multimedia Controller (an Intel 80201EB/ER or something like that).
- GezusK, on 07/23/2008, -3/+39To be fair, lets take a Linux distro from 7 yrs ago...lets see how easy it installs then, LOL
- robinwilson2, on 07/23/2008, -18/+53OK, install Linux on your laptop with a broadcom Wireless card - tell me which on is easier then? (BTW, you need to have WiFi working when you get done. (NDISWrapper - tried it, craps out about every 15 minutes, and it wasn't exactly "easy" to even find - much less "install"...)
Also, reconfigure your desktop to make it fit your laptop display's max resolution (1680x1050), and do that without having to get into the bowels of X11 configs - or use 2 different 'desktop'/'video resolution tools to make it happen (and explain why it's a 'root' user requirement to change the desktop's default display resolution).
Or find an app you installed without having to traverse 4 layers of menus that make _zero_ sense (KDE, or Gnome) to a normal human. (You have to admit - XP's programs menu may suck - but it's far better than the goofy way the various WM's organize applications "for you" in Linux.)
Oh yeah, install FireFox 3 - without having to download a file and manually unload it - because there's no tool that automatically installs a package from the default desktop interface. BTW, once you get that - install the flash and shockwave stuff too.
Until Linux comes up with a fix for this sort of crap - XP is still a more complete OS.
Oh, get a tool that lets me share my calendar with all the Microsoft bigots out there the way Outlook does (hopefully without being such a huge pig - like Outlook). Reading email is only half the challenge guys... And I don't need a tool that let's me create a 'linux style' calendar - I need one that let's me connect to Exchange and manage calendars using the Exchange server - since everyone else in just about any major organization is using Exchange and they aren't going to switch.
That being said, I like Linux - and I've been struggling with a way to use it. - norman619, on 07/23/2008, -13/+48You've obviously never installed Vista or haven't installed vista since the beta releases. My Vista install, which was only a month ago, was the easiest and smoothest OS instill I ever did. I just popped the DVD in rebooted, chose the partition, formatted it, then let it go. It only asked me once if I wanted it to go to the Internet to find my drivers to which I said yes. It found ALL of my drivers and installed them w/o any further input from me. It doesn't get any easier than this to install an OS.
- widgetmaker, on 07/23/2008, -16/+51Nice and fair article, "pre-infected, sad to have it it on there, etc" when Vista is a good OS not the rubbish it's made out to be.
- YodaJones, on 07/23/2008, -47/+81FTA: " I bought, a Dell Inspiron 530S from my local Best Buy came pre-infected with Vista Home Premium. "
How true. - trogdoor, on 07/23/2008, -8/+40*If all of your hardware is supported, that is thankfully now not unlikely with current Linux distributions but is still far from guaranteed.
- jamesdew, on 07/23/2008, -4/+36a customised install doesn't count
- kdesu, on 07/23/2008, -3/+34@cotaskmemalloc: Open Synaptic, install the package called "gproftpd". Better?
- yeskia, on 07/23/2008, -15/+45Still, who actually cares?
- solidus636, on 07/23/2008, -1/+29I honestly think Vista is the easiest to install.
Just pop the disk in, format, and let it sit there installing.
After it's booted, it automatically downloads all the drivers you need from Windows Update, and most peripherals are already supported.
I have to install my printer drivers from a disc using XP, but with Vista it just works.
I know XP is old, but still. - yessuz, on 07/23/2008, -4/+29oh common, let's try to compare the EASE of installation between:
Windows XP (released in 2001)
and
Debian at 2001,.. or Red Hat 6.1 in 2001?
How hard can it be.. huh? - bumcheekcity, on 07/23/2008, -15/+39Sheesh, If you've only an SP2 CD, SP3 is hardly hard to get. You can download an .exe from Microsoft's website, and then run it. Although nLite is actually a lot easier, and allows you to totally customise your install.
Ironically, because I nLite all my WinXP installations, I have less updating to do after I reinstall Windows than Ubuntu.
And what the ***** is the author going on about when he says that most vendors don't ship their OS's with driver disks. They just all do. It takes about 3 mins to install drivers from a disc, which admittedly is more than the 0mins if Linux correctly recognises your drivers, but a lot less than the time it takes if it doesn't, let me tell you.
Linux is easy to install if it recognises your drivers. If you don't have them, life can suck even if you do know exactly what you have. XP is easy to install, and easy to install your drivers, BECAUSE EVERYONE GIVES YOU A CD. Even if you don't, about 7 seconds on driverguide.com will solve all your problems. This article is a load of *****. - BurgerPunch, on 07/23/2008, -7/+28* apart from your wireless and 3D card
- GezusK, on 07/23/2008, -2/+23On the other hand, if Linux doesn't have the drivers needed, its a much bigger hassle to find and get them installed. If they even exist.
- Reines, on 07/23/2008, -6/+26norman619: If you customized your install DVD then it's hardly a fair comparison.
- armo, on 07/23/2008, -1/+20"XP didn't include the drivers for the ethernet card, video card, or multimedia controller."
I can't remember the last time I did an XP install where it did recognise any of these. Makes it exceptionally difficult if you can't find the drivers cd or grab another comp to download them.
I've had much the same trouble with Vista as well where it doesn't recognise your network card. Although if it does it'll find more drivers through windows update than XP ever did. - headband, on 07/23/2008, -12/+30I remember my sister screwed up her XP install one day...I was at college so I couldn't come reinstall for her and she wasn't able to figure out how to reinstall
so I told her to go get one of my live ubuntu discs if she needed the internet before I could come fix it and she ended up installing it instead - cdmarcus, on 07/23/2008, -0/+18Ubuntu does not use the VESA drivers by default. It'll use the best available free driver (like nv or radeon), and offer a download of any supported proprietary drivers (like nvidia or fglrx upon the first logon.
- marx2k, on 07/23/2008, -7/+25Sounds almost exactly like an Ubuntu install. Didn't it ask you for your username/pass to set up?
- cartisdm, on 07/23/2008, -1/+18I'll give you that, but you've got to admit that they're getting better and better at supporting our hardware. I've installed Ubuntu on three separate computers in the past year and all went without a hitch.
- jlynas, on 07/23/2008, -3/+20MS-DOS is easier to install than XP. Doesn't mean you should bother with that, either.
- mwalker05, on 07/23/2008, -1/+17who buys pcs from brick and mortar stores anymore? just love that lack of customization and added markup eh?
- jonathandyer, on 07/23/2008, -5/+21It doesn't matter that he customized his install, all that seems to have changed was the lack of a CD Key entry or user name/password. Vista installs extremely easy and picks up most if not all of the drivers needed automatically. Microsoft did something right with Vistas install.
- grumpyrain, on 07/23/2008, -2/+18XP is actually surprisingly hard to install. My XP Pro disk is SP1, so I needed to stuff around with nlite to slipstream SP2 to install it on a volume larger than 80GB. Its one saving grace is that it is trivial to find drivers for such a popular OS, although it normally involves downloading NIC drivers on some other PC and putting them onto a USB stick.
Vista is without doubt the easiest version of Windows to install, chiefly because (like most Linux distros), there are enough drivers on the CD to get yourself up and running to a point where it can automatically search online for better drivers. My Vista box was the first time installing Windows that I did not need to insert one driver CD or disk.
I can't talk about Linux as if it is a single OS, but my comment applies to pretty much every distro I have installed. Generally speaking, the installation is just as smooth as Vista, but there is still the odd piece of hardware where you just can not get working, or at least need to find instructions on some obscure Wiki with a bunch of term commands to get it working. I had an Ubuntu install about a year back where it would kernel panic on boot if the WLAN card was plugged in. Even so, I would say it was easier than XP, and close enough to par with Vista. - armo, on 07/23/2008, -4/+19everyday users does want to have to open a terminal and type "sudo apt-get instlal gproftpd".
Applications -> Add/Remove, Search for ftp server, Tick the box next to GPROFTPD or PureAdmin (your choice), Click apply changes.
Personally I think it much quicker (and definitely reproducible, which is important in tutorials) to use the command, that's your choice. - Slovenian6474, on 07/23/2008, -4/+19Agreed. The guy next to me at work despises Vista. I was talking with him about how I've never really ran into a problem with it. Turns out, he's never used it. He's just going on what other people are saying about it...never the less, he hates it.
- podgey22, on 07/23/2008, -1/+16I'll just say: My SP0 (retail, not beta) install was a lot hairier. It was missing drivers, had no ability to resize existing partitions and then destroyed my existing boot setup. Genius.
- dperren, on 07/23/2008, -7/+21What an utterly imbecilic article: "How can an operating system in 2008 not support an Ethernet card!?"
I take it he means "How can a seven-year-old operating system in 2008 not support an Ethernet card!?"
I wonder how well Redhat 7.2 would do in comparison to XP. - Vadi0, on 07/23/2008, -0/+14Depends on linux are you on here.
On most, Applications - Add/Remove is dead easy (and no, it's not the windows equivalent. You actually install programs from there!) - estvir, on 07/23/2008, -2/+16I think the fairest part was where he compared a 7 year old versions of Windows to a < 1 year old version of Linux and where he lied about updating after an installation.*
* http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=496 - GezusK, on 07/23/2008, -2/+16SP3 doesn't change the 7yr old installer.
- orangefly, on 07/23/2008, -1/+14@norman
at work i have about a hundred dells and xp will install virtually none of them, while ubuntu install all of them....yes, if you are building a machine get something decent, but most people just get the standard onboard.... - DiscoUnderpants, on 07/23/2008, -4/+17Is someone setting up a FTP server really an average joe sixpack? To do the same in Windows is not always trivial. Also you dont have to use the command line. There are tools provided with distros like ubuntu to allow you to do the same thru the GUI.
- arjie, on 07/23/2008, -0/+13I did this, and it was really simple, very few questions. Then when I booted up it went straight to Vista! My Linux stuff just disappeared!
- baron1948, on 07/23/2008, -4/+17cotaskmemalioc, what "regular everyday user" is trying to install FTP anyway?
I agree with Ademan. With any "new (to the user) technology" there will be a learning curve. I think for power users that curve is greater because we know how to do whatever we want in Windows and it's frustrating because the "Linux way" is different. I think Ademan's point about getting interactive help from people who have already learned "the Linux way" is key to a smooth transition from M$ to Linux. - mithrasinvictus, on 07/23/2008, -8/+21does it automatically configure dual boot?
- mrsack, on 07/23/2008, -19/+31"Linux is easier to install than XP"
Installing programs ON Linux, that's another story. - caseycoold, on 07/23/2008, -3/+15Yeah; just toss out your computer and go get a new one! It's the mactard way!
- seizium, on 07/23/2008, -0/+12To be fair they should be trying to install Redhat Linux 7.1 then compare it to a standard XP install. Hmm. No ethernet either? What a surprise!
- askantik, on 07/23/2008, -1/+12You go ahead and stick to buying a $1500 computer that has hardware only worth $500.
- Kral, on 07/23/2008, -0/+11Creative sound cards didn't even work in Vista.. Creative just plain sucks regardless of OS.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 614 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is