Digg - Linux user in Vista land.

506 Comments
Who Dugg It?

sjbooher, on 02/26/2008, -9/+16Thanks for the update, I was wondering how it was going.
- terminality, on 02/26/2008, -2/+5Sorry for the comment abuse, but a mirror can be found at http://blog.indigio.com.nyud.net:8080/index.php/20 ...
  EDIT: or http://blog.indigio.com.nyud.net:8090/index.php/20 ...
- xptoast, on 02/26/2008, -8/+2I didn't see anything on that site. It must have crashed.
  
  http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/5092/thisisntth ...
  - chrisbarr, on 02/26/2008, -0/+9thanks for the useful screenshot.
    - xptoast, on 02/27/2008, -1/+1Your welcome.
  - magus_melchior, on 02/26/2008, -5/+1I suppose he decided to try and run the blog off his Vista box.
- FutureGuy, on 02/26/2008, -9/+13Couldn't read any further then this.
  "Still nonexistent. I didn’t find a single global option, even 3rd party, for managing what is and isn’t installed on my Vista laptop" Heard of Add/Remove programs? The author doesn't even pretend to be non-biased.
  - wellyuk, on 02/26/2008, -9/+9Yep. And...
    "
    Specific UI complaints:
    * I like to use alt+ left click to move windows
    * I like to use alt+right click to resize windows
    "
    Right.... you're not on Linux and that you're complaining considering a different key combination to resize or move windows is a UI issue is pretty pathetic. Why would you have to use a key to resize or move a window anyway? What's wrong with dragging the title bar to move the window or dragging the window edge to resize the window?
    
    I don't see the point of his blog posting. He blatantly had no interest in using Vista so why did he bother? He's essentially said "It's not linux, I'm not interested". Which is fine, but why he had to masquerade his blog posting as a "I'm going to try and use vista instead of linux", I have no idea.
    - cyberwiz01, on 02/26/2008, -2/+15I couldnt read TFA but the Alt+leftclick or Alt+rightclick in Linux allows you to resise or move the window from anywhere within that window. There is no need to move your mouse to the titlebar or the edge of the window. It is much faster and easier IMO and is a feature that I really miss when I find myself on a Windows box.
      - wellyuk, on 02/26/2008, -2/+8Ok that's a fair point, I didn't realise that was what he meant. That said, I find I have enough hours in the day that moving the mouse to the edge of the window when I occasionally resize or move windows about isn't too much of a time waster.
      - sancho, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1That's one of my biggest complaints about OS X. That and no sloppy-focus. Any diggers know of ways to get this functionality on a Mac? I've searched to no avail.
    - bejayel, on 02/26/2008, -1/+5I think the point of it is that there is no really quick way to do it. ctrl clicking anywhere to resize is a lot faster than finding the edge of the window, same with moving the window. But you're right, he is a douche bag about it.
      
      There is one thing i would like to see happen in windows that is in linux. Scrolling for whatever the mouse is over. I can scroll a window in the background without losing focus to my foreground window, SO NICE. It is a bit of getting used to, having to have your mouse over whatever you are trying to scroll that is, but once you get it you hope and pray that windows will get it some time.
      - bjornski, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1That sounds handy. Only marginally, but handy.
    - bowe, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3Alt, Space, S ---Resize
      Alt, Space, M ---Move
      Alt, Space, N ---Minimize
      Alt, Space, X ---Maximize
      Have at it. If that's too many button presses, download autohotkey and map the key combination to correspond to the Linux. Autohotkey will allow you to make any keyboard shortcut you want and more, but the shortcut functionality is built into vista. Just make a shortcut to an app, pull up it's properties and enter the key combo in the corresponding box. Pretty damn easy if you ask me.
  - SmokedL, on 02/26/2008, -2/+16He is perfectly well aware of the Add Remove Program control panel applet. It however is in no way a package manager, which is what he is talking about. Add Remove Programs lets you uninstall, or in some cases modify, what you have yourself manually installed. That is all.
    
    A package manager gives you the ability to install the great majority of all the software that is available for your platform at the click of a button.
    Want to install a video player? Open your package manager GUI, search for video, select the programs you like and click install.
    
    You get guaranteed virus free software that has been specifically tested and verified to work on your platform.
    
    Once you install software the package manager will automatically manage updates of the installed software and it's dependencies. It does this for every single piece of software on your machine.
    
    Run into a problem with your drive, files get corrupted because of faulty hardware, software, whatever: Just run your package managers version of emerge -e world (Reinstall everything with one command in Gentoo). Every single piece of software you have installed, including the system itself, will be reinstalled/repaired. Note that this is done with the latest version available rather than crushing your system by overwriting newer software with older the way that a "repair" under windows will.
    
    I could go on, but I think you get the point. Windows has nothing that can even remotely compete with a package manager such as apt, or portage. They play in an entirely different league.
    - wellyuk, on 02/26/2008, -4/+6I don't think that's an issue with Windows Vista itself, more that no Windows user has taken it upon themselves to write a package manager. I think that's a pretty poor complaint about the operating system because it's not really related to the OS itself and more this guys work flow.
    - wellyuk, on 02/26/2008, -2/+3Oh and after a bit of research, there are a few package managers for Windows - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Package_management_sy ...
      
      I doubt they compare with apt or others but the option is there all the same. Anyway, I'm a mac user and I'm fine for package managers.
    - FutureGuy, on 02/26/2008, -5/+2Ohh ya, and people complained that the browser shouldn't be part of the OS. If MS ships a feature like this every Linux fanboy would personally sue MS.
      - bjornski, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2Well, at least every software company whose product wasn't included in the package installer.
    - SmokedL, on 02/26/2008, -0/+6"I don't think that's an issue with Windows Vista itself"
      Actually, it is. Windows and Linux distributions are fundamentally different in their possibilities in this aspect. In most Linux distributions the entire platform is managed by the distribution, including the great majority of software that is available. The video player is not a separate part, It is an integral part of the distribution that can be tested and even modified to work without issues. This is enabled by the free nature of the software. It is simply not possible to do in Windows. The software is usually proprietary, closed source, and there are various restrictions on how you may distribute and modify it. Repacking it is illegal and requires reverse engineering. There is no reasonable way to figure out a programs dependencies in order to integrate it with a repository. The installer is a black box that does "something" to the filesystem and registry.
      
      It's all but impossible(and a legal quagmire) to attempt to create a package manager for windows that approaches the abilities of those used by Linux distributions. The two worlds are fundamentally different in this way and the proprietary world is very unlikely to ever catch up due to these differences.
    - SmokedL, on 02/26/2008, -2/+3"Ohh ya, and people complained that the browser shouldn't be part of the OS. If MS ships a feature like this every Linux fanboy would personally sue MS."
      
      You don't seem to understand. All of this is free software created by others. It is not abuse of a monopoly position by a dominant incumbent. Software is only aggregated and made to work well as a whole by the distribution creators. If MS wants their browser included distributions would be perfectly happy to do so. All MS would need to do is supply the source code for running their browser on linux under an open source license.
    - bowe, on 02/26/2008, -3/+4You need more Vista programs? Control Panel - Programs - Get Programs online.
      It's a one click install process for some things from windows marketplace, sorta like Klik for KDE.
  - exactopposite, on 02/26/2008, -2/+3maybe you aren't familiar with package managers. add/remove is not something i'd consider to be a package manager at all. I don't think there is anything for windows that works like synaptic or yast for example, but i could be wrong. Either way, if it does exist, add/remove definitely isn't it.
  - neko, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1And @wellyuk: You obviously don't get it, perhaps the author should have been a bit more descriptive, but I guess that would be like a Windows user saying "Left click on the Window icon in the bottom left of the screen or push the Super key", when you could just say "Open the Start Menu" and people who use windows would know what you meant.
    
    Alt-Left mouse for us lets us drag the window -without- having to click the title bar. It works anywhere on the whole window. It works on windows that don't have title bars. You can just fling windows all over your desktop very quickly without hunting and pecking for the title bar, which is a fairly obvious usability improvement.
    
    Alt-Right mouse works similarly for resizing. You don't have to position the cursor on the ~2px window border, only be roughly near the corner you want to resize from. Try it out, you'll wonder why it doesn't come as standard.
- salazarmark, on 02/26/2008, -7/+2This author's arguments are just a poor excuse of not knowing windows. Senior Citizens can use Windows and OS X, because that's how software is supposed to be USER FRIENDLY. Ever heard that word moronic ryan heardley? Also the "it just works" moniker only apply to Mac OS X, Linux is far off that field dumbo.
  - wiresjr, on 02/28/2008, -0/+1"It just works" applies to any situation you happen to be in where everything "just works". Sure as hell isn't always Mac OS, or Windows, or any linux distro in the world. Ever heard the word 'subjective'?
SDL486, on 02/26/2008, -116/+17Ron Paul
- chromerium, on 02/26/2008, -2/+21lol?
- wigren, on 02/26/2008, -15/+6It's people like you..... o ***** it. Enjoy your fascism!
- Ouze, on 02/26/2008, -2/+6c'mon, like his insertation of RP was any less awkward, random, and out of place then most of the other ones on digg.
- Bob24, on 02/26/2008, -1/+3I dugg you up...you have to laugh when you click "show comment" on a buried comment only to see the words "Ron Paul" once again. :D
- lebruf, on 02/26/2008, -1/+5Man, I wish Digg gave a tally of the up and down votes rather than the net score.
  I ***** love the Ron Paul comment, but I feel I would invalidate its infamy by digging it up.
  - bjornski, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2There's a Firefox add-on that does exactly that (and I love it to pieces).
    
    http://www.neaveru.com/wordpress/index.php/2007/08 ...
- kamikazecow, on 02/26/2008, -2/+10Matt Damon
  - SyntraFTW, on 02/26/2008, -2/+2Ben Affleck
- AeonTorpor, on 02/27/2008, -0/+2Forest Gump
barwin, on 02/26/2008, -1/+12I wish WinMover worked on Win XP x64 .. no dice :(
- joincamp, on 02/26/2008, -0/+4I have an autohotkey script that does the same thing on my computer at home in vista 64. If you want it, just let me know.
  - barwin, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2I would definitely really really appreciate that. I went ahead and downloaded/installed autohotkey. Thanks a ton for pointing that out. Is your script a custom script or is it available publicly?
    - joincamp, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1this is where i got it from.
      http://preview.tinyurl.com/3xndwu
      I customized my own a little to make it be able to turn it off without closing the script, but this will get you what you want.
  - barwin, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2Found one in the forums, works great: http://www.autohotkey.com/forum/topic2062.html
insllvn, on 02/26/2008, -14/+84Cool. Thanks for sharing your experience. When I had to troubleshoot Vista for a tech support job, I learned a little bit about it and how to get around. I never felt at home there, the way I do on my GNOME desktop. I used 95/98/200/XP before switching to Linux when I saw the Vista debacle on the horizon and I decided to give Linux a try. I have never wanted to go back. The ability to easily and thoroughly tweek everything really allows you to make your desktop YOUR desktop, if that makes sense (yeah I know KDE is even more customizable, but I am happier with GNOME). Package management is another thing I have come to love since switching from Windows. I can't imagine administering my computer and keeping it both loaded with functionality and simultaneously uncluttered without synaptic. It is a godsend not to have to hunt about online or in obtuse Win32 folders for things that should or shouldn't be there. Most of all, I laugh at how I used to view the command line, as this outdated and unnecessary relic. I now rely on it heavily (i have it mapped so I can launch it quite quickly) and don't know how I survived without it.

Just my 2 cents from the other side.
- wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -1/+42As some one who has taken issue with linux fanboyism countless times in the last few years I would like to thank you for sticking to linux's actual strengths instead of making crap up or misconstruing the facts. It's a real breath of fresh air to see something like that. I agree with you on all counts. I have to agree that I too enjoy the customizability of linux. The package managers I have used so far also, in many ways, simplify things by far over windows.
  
  However, I do have two major issues and these are the core issues I have with many of the linux fanboy's claims. As a computer tech who deals with individual business owners and home computer users every day I have come to realize, though my clients are capable of learning computers, they don't want to. They hold the opinion, and I think a valid one, that computers exist to make their lives simpler. They exist to SIMPLIFY their day to day activities. I don't feel linux does that. I don't really think Windows does that but I've yet to see any one claim Linux is easier to learn than Windows. The console is fun and all, and I personally don't even use a file manager because I prefer to do file management from the console. However I also know that I CAN NOT expect the average user to learn commands. I also know that when they go to save files to a networked drive they will expect to be able to click file > save, then browse directly top the networked drive and save their files. Currently most programs use their own file open/save dialog and NONE of them recognize the way gnomes file manage mounts network drives. The alternative being to drop to the console and manually mount it to a folder in my home directory or use a gui app that might as well be using terminology from a Klingon disruptor manual, both of which requiring root privileges, and all of which is far beyond what a novice wants to learn.
  
  It's little problems like that, all of which are individually trivial and easy to over come, but are so numerous and prevalent that by shear numbers alone they become a massive hindrance. I want linux to succeed. It may not seem like it sometimes but I really do. I like linux and enjoy my time playing around with it. I see potential to do really great things. I love it's flexibility. However, it is NOT ready to replace the OS on the desktops of novice users. I've said it before and I'll say it again: Linux needs a LOT of polish. The console SHOULD be an "outdated and unnecessary relic." User's should only need the console when preforming diagnostic work... like it is in Windows. Sure computer geeks, ourselves included, can have the choice to use the console, but there should never be a NEED to use it in the day to day activities of the average user. Things like that just need to be dealt with before a novice, given the opportunity to compare in an unbiased format, will ever be interested in using Linux rather than Windows.
  
  It will take a commitment not only on the part of the linux kernel devs or the various distros, but also the devs of other programs. And that will take the linux and open source community in general acknowledging linux's flaws and demanding they be dealt with.
  - MacSuxWindozSux, on 02/26/2008, -3/+12I completely agree. The Console (Bash etc) while very powerful shouldn't have to be used except for rare circumstances.
    
    Having to type apt -get and without any sort of menu or instruction works great when it works. For many it's completely useless because they either don't know about it or they haven't the slightest clue how to use it or what they want from it.
    
    Having a window with a list of Applications to choose from is far more useful. But there's issues where the Apps you want aren't in the list and getting them into the list is a pain in the ass that requires SUDO and other console commands. -FAIL
    
    RPM's in general concept are great. The idea you can just go to a website, download a file and boom the App installs onto your computer is a much simpler approach.
    
    Finding a repository, manually editing the package repository sources, then using apt, and typing everything case sensitive Firefox.2006-14.01.xx... yadda yadda...
    Sucks compared to just going to Firefox.com, downloading firefox, and double clicking on the installer.
  - warriorscot, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3I like linux, but I am a tinkerer I take pleasure in taking the time to customise it to my taste, however its still a bugger for a first time user and people who don't want to learn to use it, once its set up it is fine but unless you have someone savvy and willing to do it it is a turn off and a disadvantage to windows in that its not in my opinion ready to go out of the box.
    
    I've spent hours trying to get dual monitors and compiz to work on my old system, not tried it with my new Nvidia card but it turned me off linux for a while.
- rento, on 02/26/2008, -11/+7I think you should make a reality check. U love to mess around with package mangement etc. most users dont. They just want to work, communicate or watch porn. Hence Linux lost right there in most cases (however u look at it is a f* maze). However my point is not that Win is better, instead, working and playing with Fedora, Win XP and Vista I can tell you that none of those are worthy the best tittle, thats why I use the 3 togheter.
  - norman619, on 02/26/2008, -1/+7Linux is for the tech savvy folks like most people here on Digg. I read the article from the stand point of a technical person. The person who wrote the article is obviously not a basic user. He actually did a good job of staying on point and not drifting too far into fanboyland. I run both Vista and Linux at home. Some things that don't quite work in Vista work great in Linux. For example, I'm running Vista Ultimate 64 bit. It doesn't like my DTV tuner card drivers. It's the 64bit that's killing me. So I just installed the tuner in my Linux media box and it works great. Try to keep in mind one OS is not any better than another. It all comes down to what you need and want to do. Both Vista and Linux have their uses for me.
    - bejayel, on 02/26/2008, -3/+1One thing that i wish worked in linux is my god damn sound blaster x-fi. If it wasnt for that, i would be permanently linux. I might switch it out for an audigy 2 just so that i can stick solely to linux, and boot to xp for when i want games or what not.
      Dont get me wrong, windows does lots of stuff right and everything, but it cant compare to gentoo and portage.
  - quantumstatejim, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1I agree partly with what you say about most users not wanting to bother with messing around with the package managers and configuration etc. This applies to loads of things that users really like about linux especially the configuration which most users will completely ignore. However I must disagree with you about the package manager, it is one of the best advantages that linux has since it is easier for the user to open this up tick a box and then click apply than using systems like windows uses with individual installers. People are scared when they are faced with the many boxes of a windows installation with the many messages asking questions they do not understand. Package managers solve this and give a good list in one easy place. I also agree that there are uses for then all.
    
    The main thing I see about windows is that there is still the software that linux cannot run despite the excellent work with Wine, especially with games. Also there are some rough edges as well in places.
- devophl, on 02/26/2008, -4/+2Well, if what I'm hearing is correct, then we might not be using desktops in 5 years anyway. Windows has gone from relatively simple to use to being horribly complicated and overrun with virus and spyware checking software. But Windows is still an OS that can be fully administered from the graphical interface. With Apple going to a Unix base, they are dealing with the same complex operating environment that Linux has. But to Apple's favor, its tried to hide as much of the Unix underpinnings as possible.
  
  What I see is a lot of people opting out of desktop systems and going to other technology. I saw a survey back in 2000 that 70% of PC use was for gaming. Well, now everyone has a PS2/3, Xbox or Wii. The iPod has replaced the PC for music. Now with smart phones, people are using PCs less for email. The only major area left is web browsing and game consoles are likely to add that feature soon.
  
  People do want simplicity and, lets face it, Windows, Linux or even MacOS don't give the level of simplicity needed for most people. I can see a huge opportunity for a device much like the iPhone to steal most of the desktop market away, replacing it with a simple easy to use device for those tasks you can't do on an iPod or Xbox.
  
  I think Vista, with its load of bloat, has gotten to a point where no one really wants to touch it. The idea of a desktop in the home is starting to become passe and very 1990s. It very well could be that this argument will be a moot point in the next two years as cheap handheld devices replace the Vista desktop.
  - bejayel, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Desktop will always have their "man in the middle" software, but dedicated devices is the way of the future.
    - quantumstatejim, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1I am not so sure, I see that some systems are heading towards integrating back with PC's so you only have one thing to deal with. This is also due to complexity, basically most of the devices will work differently and the user does not want a huge amount of devices which they have to learn to use individually. Hence media centre PC's which are reducing the number of things needed, rather than having a dvd player, TV, PC and digital tuning system surely it is simpler and easier for the user to have one device which does it all.
  - warriorscot, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2PCs are still the gaming gold standard no console has yet came up with anything that would make a proper PC gamer switch to a console, other than driving and beat em ups I would not even consider a console and even then those are fun games but not my favorite and the games I like are awkward on consoles.
    
    Most of the solutions are just glorified PCs prettied up to look as something else, we are going more towards PCs than we ever have the way we use them is different and they are capable of new things but they are still PCs.
  - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -1/+2hmm a valid point... not sure I totally agree... but dugg none the less.
- oshu, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1"Currently most programs use their own file open/save dialog and NONE of them recognize the way gnomes file manage mounts network drives"
  
  Nonsense. I am using Fedora 8 right now and all my major apps use Gnome's File dialogs. Firefox, Open Office, Gimp, RhythmBox, Thunderbird, Movie Player, etc...
  
  How do you expect to have any credibility when you are plainly mistaken or lying?
HugeAlReturns, on 02/26/2008, -30/+65Vista FTW: Wireless Support
Linux FTW: Everything else
- smacksaw, on 02/26/2008, -7/+37http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NdisWrapper
  
  Works for me.
  - HugeAlReturns, on 02/26/2008, -3/+6Works for one of my wireless cards after a lot of effort. The other card is a total dud with Linux - don't buy D-Link!
    - cawpin, on 02/26/2008, -0/+10Um, D-Link works out of the box with most Linuxes. Mine did, that's why I bought it.
      - capiCrimm, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3*distros
        
        there is only one linux. Unless you meant versions.
  - ferrite, on 02/26/2008, -0/+4Unless you're using a 64bit system without 64bit XP drivers...
    - bejayel, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Xp's 64 bit network like to drop wireless connections randomly for no reason what-so-ever. My buddy at school hated it because he had a xp64 bit as a bridge between the router and his linux box and he couldent hold an ssh connection for more than 5 minutes usually.
      - doctordbx, on 02/27/2008, -1/+1Your buddy at school?
  - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -4/+8do you think your grandma could set that up on her own?
    
    yes you could do it for her but the point is that there are more "grandmas" than there are "smacksaws".
    - adrianmonk, on 02/26/2008, -2/+5And there are also people like me. I enjoy tinkering with computers. I spend a lot of time doing it. I used to be a Unix administrator, so I can tweak Unix and Linux machines and get stuff working. Given enough time, I could surely figure out how to write a wireless network driver from scratch.
      
      But I don't want to. Unless I'm writing my own driver for fun (or profit), I don't want to screw around making drivers work. I'm interested in computers, just not in that area. Linux seems to assume I am. I hate that.
      
      And so my Linux machine at home has a b0rken ATI driver. I spent about 8 hours trying to make it work, and then another 8 hours again later, and after that, I decided to just live with a monitor that won't blank automatically after 30 minutes. So now I have a Linux machine at home where I have to turn the monitor off when I stop using it.
      
      I think all this has to do with the fact that I'm running a 64-bit kernel, and the 64-bit drivers aren't that great. I chose a 64-bit kernel because I was happily using a 64-bit kernel under Solaris in 1995 with no problems whatsoever, so I naturally assumed that 13 years later, 64-bit Linux should be smooth sailing. But it's not. The video driver doesn't work, and I can't get very many amd64 plugins for Firefox either.
      
      Getting back to the topic of wireless, right now I really can't see myself bothering with something like ndiswrapper. If I had a laptop, I'd want Linux on it (since that is the mainstream version of Unix now), but wireless support seems like a landmine. So my solution for now is simply this: don't get a laptop. I don't need one that badly. I'm not willing to use Windows, and I'm not willing to spend 10 hours getting a wi-fi driver working, and I'm not willing to have a laptop that doesn't have working wi-fi.
    - NOFXY, on 02/26/2008, -1/+4i think most grandmas. if they know how to turn ON a computer have a great advantage. anything else beyond that, on any OS, is a miracle.
    - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2@adrianmonk
      I have to admit that your issues with linux ATI Drivers are actually a problem on ATI's end. However, they have released drivers since that fix many of those issues.... Ubuntu however, doesn't list those drivers in it's repositories (when I looked a month ago... and I have auto update turned on so it should have told me if it happened since) so you have to go to the AMD site and download them, then use apt-get (not the gui package manager... which doesn't list this package for some reason) to get a re-packager app to turn what you got from amd into a package apt-get can use... which on most ubuntu systems results in an error (a mistake made on ati's side) that has to be fixed by unpacking the files, changing a folder name, repacking the files, then repackaging the files. Followed by installing it.
      
      All of that from the command line. They still don't properly support dual head ether... even though when I manually installed those drivers on gentoo they did.
      
      @NOFXY
      most grandmas manage to click the little yellow balloon that pops up when it say's "we have found a new network, click here to join it" in windows.
      
      It's not always that simple in windows, but in those cases I could still walk grandma through it over the phone. Even though I've had more experience with ndiswrapper than I care to think about I seriously doubt I could explain it in terms a 80 year old woman could understand.
  - InorganicMatter, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Never works for me.
- armo, on 02/26/2008, -5/+25http://madwifi.org/
  
  Works for me.
- carpespasm, on 02/26/2008, -5/+36Nothing.
  Works for me.
- Jb611, on 02/26/2008, -9/+30For the love of god would people please stop using FTW all the time?
  - insllvn, on 02/26/2008, -2/+25Ending unnecessary abbreviations for the win!
    - dinostabOMG, on 02/26/2008, -0/+23EUAFTW!
    - BoneheadFarker, on 02/26/2008, -0/+8@dinostabOMG
      
      That sounds like something I do after eating chili...
  - thinman1189, on 02/26/2008, -2/+12IMO should be stopped first.
    - WernerCD, on 02/26/2008, -4/+6IMO FTW FTL
    - Waiting2awake, on 02/26/2008, -2/+9that just simply isn't true. A.F.A.I.K
      
      Also - Just I.M.H.O
    - SpacePirate, on 02/26/2008, -3/+7FU.
    - ubuwalker31, on 02/26/2008, -2/+4omgwtfbbq
    - d03boy, on 02/26/2008, -1/+3wysiwyg
    - wellyuk, on 02/26/2008, -2/+5I am the LOLrus, I am the LOLrus. FTL FTL!
    - hockey, on 02/26/2008, -3/+3Well IANAL but I think that there's no problem with using FTW instead of typing it out.
  - JeffD, on 02/26/2008, -3/+5You my friend are FTL.
    - Scalpels, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3I read that as Faster Than Light. I felt stupid not seeing it as For The Lose first...
  - Stonekeeper, on 02/26/2008, -1/+2WTF?
  - neko, on 02/27/2008, -0/+3I say let them have their abbreviations, just as long as they can ***** use homonyms like their/they're your/you're were/where through/threw correctly!
- mtwolf, on 02/26/2008, -2/+2LOL
- 22magnum, on 02/26/2008, -3/+5my broadcom card works just fine on 7.10...
- Noctem, on 02/26/2008, -9/+14yeah, Crysis works pretty darn good in Linux. So does World in Conflict and Supreme Commander.
  
  Oh wait...
  - slasc, on 02/26/2008, -5/+16That's not a linux flaw...that's a developer flaw. Namely, the developers not developing on an open platform for cross-platform distribution...
    
    Id does it...
    - ZeRux, on 02/26/2008, -4/+12
      - wellyuk, on 02/26/2008, -0/+5Then you'll not be interested in using Linux. It doesn't really matter though, there's plenty of room for different operating systems.
  - int10h, on 02/26/2008, -1/+7This is how it looks with WINE currently: http://appdb.winehq.org/appimage.php?iId=14213
  - Noctem, on 02/26/2008, -3/+8I was merely responding to the OP's claim that, apparently, the only thing Windows is good for is WiFi, and Linux is just great for everything else. It's a completely laughable, unsubstantiated claim, and I'm not sure why he's being dugg up so high, but then again, this _is_ Digg - Slashdot Jr.
    - tapo, on 02/28/2008, -0/+2For me, I use Windows for games, and Linux for everything else. My wifi happened to work out of the box.
      
      Maybe the OP doesn't play games? Why must every comment be hostile and criticizing your operating system of choice? It's just software, for christ's sake.
- wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -13/+9you forgot ease of use, linux is massive fail in that department.
  not that windows is any where near perfect.
  - d03boy, on 02/26/2008, -7/+4depends who's using it
    - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+9Oh so linux should only be for computer geeks and 25-year-old'd living in their parents basement.
      
      You sir, and people like you, are at the core what is wrong with Linux.
      - Shouden, on 02/26/2008, -1/+126 and I live on the 1st floor of my parents home, thank you very much.
      - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2@shouden
        
        Yeh I'm not much better honestly. 24 and living in a house owned by my mom and my aunt less than a 1 minute drive from my parent's house. I'm a computer nerd to boot. :-D
        
        Still don't think I should have exclusive rights to being able to using linux though...
      - roebeet, on 02/26/2008, -1/+1What I got out of d03boy's comment was that ease of use depends on who you are, and what you're used to. imo, take two people who've never used computers before and give one Linux and one Windows, and I'd bet the ease of use is about the same. Each OS has its pluses and minuses - but since so many people are used to the Windows interface, it makes its harder for them to switch.
      - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3I've done that... jsut not at the same time. And no... ease of use in windows was better, even though the person using linux didn't know it.
    - spoolboyy, on 02/26/2008, -0/+5agreed wolferz....haha.
      
      A big problelm that I see in Linux as a developer is that its developed for developer's by developers. Most "normal" people I know ask me "What's a Linux?" when I tell them its on my laptop. They'll often follow that up with "Will it run on Windows XP?"
      
      Linux is extremely cumbrsome for a "normal" user, which is NOT 98% of the users of Linux. So for the population of Linux users, its fine. If we want to make Linux (any flavor) a viable option for the general user, they should NEVER be forced to go to the command line.
      
      Grandma, Aunt Maybel, my dad, little kids and yes, 20-somethings with degrees in computer science should all be able to change any setting on their pc without having to go the the terminal and key in some command that was probably really funny to the dev's who thought it up (yes in their parent's basements ;) ) think: "less"
      
      Even more important would be tutorials online (this is something we could ALL help with) that actually explain what each command does, rather than just list 6 or 8 mysterious commands that somehow get your drivers installed via ndiswrapper.
      regular people dont know, want to know and could actually migrate if conditions were right, because Linux IS good enough to be a replacement especially with the vast improvements in recent years.
      
      Linux is AWESOME. I'm saying this to not come off as a basher, I love Linux but for it to be an optino for a 'regular' consumer it needs more help. The movement is gaining momentum and with that, Linux is getting easier to use thank goodness.
  - slasc, on 02/26/2008, -5/+11You haven't run linux in recent years, have you? Ubuntu is far up on the easy to use scale from Windows...much closer to Apple actually...
    - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -3/+4Uhm... Yes I have. I was running gutsy gibbon on my laptop before the hard drive died. I am currently running Ubuntu Server 7.10 on one of my file servers. I set up also run ubuntu regularly from a virtualized environment on my windows machine as a diagnostic and computer forensics platform for hard drives I connect to my computer via a USB adapter.
      
      NO! Ubuntu is not far up on the scale from Windows. It's way down on it.
      
      I will give Ubuntu kudos for being the most user friendly of all the linux's that I have tried, but any distro that expects a novice to know what services have to be stopped to update another server is not user friendly. Any distro that expects users to understand that they just can't save files directly to networked storage but have to manually mount the network share in their home directory is not user friendly. Any distro that spits out archaic garbage when an install fails and hours upon hours of looking for a solution online does not produce one even when that searching is being done by a computer tech of almost TEN YEARS, is not user friendly.
      
      Ubuntu is about as user friendly as windows 3.11... 95 if you want to be generous.
      - bejayel, on 02/26/2008, -2/+1That is just because you are used to windows and dont give it a chance. You actually need to use it more than once in a blue moon to realize how much easier it is.
      - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3.... did you my comment above?
        
        It is was my main and in fact ONLY os for my laptop which went on site with me to every computer job.
        It is my diagnostic platform from my home computer that I use at least twice a week.
        I still run a linux file server even though I was forced to set up a Windows 2003 Server machine because I was running into too many issues with the linux one.
        And YES I have given it a chance. I've been giving it chances since 1998. I STILL am.
        
        the things I described are inexcusable. A novice can NOT over come those things on their own, and there are countless more where they come from going back no more than a year. I was eventually forced to move to windows 2003 server for my home file server because I was spending too much time trying to get linux to share printers or let me access files on older computers or some other BS that a Windows 2003 Server does with no configuration what so ever.
        
        I am STILL giving linux a chance as I still haven't written it off, and in case you haven't read my other comments I actually LIKE linux. The issue is that the novice user can't deal with the issues I am running into on a day to day basis. For me its a nice challenge (when it's not happening to machines I depend on for my business) to a novice it's a catastrophe that culminates in the purchase of a new computer.
      - quantumstatejim, on 02/26/2008, -1/+0"any distro that expects a novice to know what services have to be stopped to update another server is not user friendly" But a novice doesn't understand what a server is, what a service is and hence won't be busy trying to update this server at all. They are probably happy enough updating by clicking the little box that pops up saying please update, clicking the ok button and leaving ti to apply the updates.
        
        In my limited experience I have found that a couple of people who i know who would be considered novices found it fairly simple to use ubuntu after I had helped show them the basics for about 20 minutes. They could write documents, browse the internet, install whatever software took their fancy in the package manager, browse files etc. which is basically what the novice wants to be able to do. It is not actually very different form using windows for simple tasks.
      - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+5As i saide below I mistyped, through some weird dyslexia I'm experiencing today. It was an automated update to a service that looked like it had something to do with APM. Halfway through the update it popped up a dialog box with a single text field listing services, separated by spaces, that it wanted to know whether it was supposed to stop them before finishing the update.
        
        Yes, with a significant amount of supervision a user can learn to use linux. I actually started my mom off on linux for her first computer, back when I was as much of a fanboy as any other. Back before I realized how arrogant I was being. My mom said she liked it. She had no idea what it was but she liked it. She was having problems and she didn't even realize she was having problems. I would watch her and see her struggling to view a picture my aunt sent her in email. She thought she was doing something wrong but in reality when she tried to open the attachment without saving it, something perfectly doable in Windows, Thunderbird was passing a call to open the file but the window manager didn't know what file to open it with, even though I had three apps on the system that could open JPEG images. There was no error... just click and nothing happened. She couldn't have possibly fixed that herself. It was after several months of things like that, each time her assuming it was her fault, that I began to realise that my computer knowledge was so far beyond hers that what was obvious to me was confusing in the extreme for her. I also began to notice this with my clients using windows.
        
        When my knowledge of computers increased I noticed that I seemed to have more and more and more problems. As if the more you knew about computer the more they broke. I assumed it was because I did more tinkering but when I began working as a computer professional I quickly realized this wasn't the case. I could sit down at a computer that a client insisted had been working great and in seconds find dozens of problems that the client was aware of, but didn't even realize was an issue. A web browser that wouldn't open certain sites. The inability to run windows updates. All assumed to be a mistake they were making or a problem out on the internet... but instead a sign of a virus trying to limit their access to removal tools or the ability to close up security holes. Things like that. When my knowledge of computers increased, so did my ability to recognize problems that I once had assumed were "just the way things are."
        
        I haven't forgotten that lesson and I've also come to realize most computer people have never learned it. This attitude of accepting the customer will never be at my level and cant be expected to, not because they aren't capable but because they have other much higher priorities, has been one of the core reasons my clients call me back time and time again.
    - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -1/+2er... I'm more dyslexic than normal today. I meant "to update another service"
    - adrianmonk, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Ubuntu isn't bad. It's what I use at home. However, some things are kinda clunky. When the update thingy runs, it shows me a bunch of updates, and it's hard to get an idea what they are, and whether I need them.
      
      Also, when I went to add more servers (i.e. a broader scope) to the set of software that could be installed (through tools like Synaptic Package Manager), there was no documentation that I could easily find that explained what my choices were. I ended up enabling something like 'everything' or 'multiverse' without really knowing what that entailed. In that instance, Ubuntu broke one of the rules of computer usability: avoid giving the user a choice without explaining what the options are.
      
      Finally, I still find the Synaptic Package Manger's user interface really confusing. It's obviously using some kind of metaphor where by default I see a list of all known software packages, and then in this very-large list there are some items that have flags on them to indicate whether they're installed, supposed to be installed but not installed yet, not supposed to be installed, or something else. That's probably best from a relational database normalization perspective, but as a human being, I think in terms of "software that is here" and "software that is there", where "here" means "on my computer" and there means "available out on the internet". I'd much prefer to see things broken down in that manner, so that the things which are in place show up in one part of the screen, and the things that are elsewhere show up in some other part of the screen. I want to have a spatial way to visualize this information.
    - NOFXY, on 02/26/2008, -1/+1.
    - marx2k, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1NOFXY wins
  - CCmachined, on 02/28/2008, -0/+1ease of use? my Ubuntu is waay easier to use than my XP install on the same machine, mainly because it has a proper office suite and Windows really really wants an antivirus. These things cost money, so why bother when i have a working alternative?
    Don't tell me about AVG and things for viruses. i value my time on my computers.
    - wolferz, on 02/29/2008, -0/+1Open Office isn't a proper office suite? since when?
- noahhoward, on 02/26/2008, -7/+4Vistas wireless is a win? News to me mate, the hoops I had to jump through yesterday were enough to ensure I never touch Vista again for a long time.
  - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+4never had a problem with it personally. Problems I normally have with wireless and windows is on windows 2000 and earlier. 2000 because driver support in general sucked ass, and everything else because they predate the era of wifi... thus requiring wifi to be hacked in, so to speak.
    
    Perhaps you should look for updated drivers from your manufacturers website, some of the lazier manufacturers wont rotate out their old... "not really vista capable" driver CDs till they start their next product cycle.
    - noahhoward, on 02/26/2008, -1/+1Nah, wireless was working fine then Vista decided there was no network and the problem was with out equipment. After chasing my tail a bit I caught on to the fact that Vista seemed to think we had never set up wireless in the first place, turned the wireless card off then back on and poof there was the network. Not saying it was even Vistas fault but the interface, with the number of windows I had to go through, the absolutely useless error messages and the flat out wrong diagnostics pissed me off. I'd imagine your average user wouldn't know where to begin.
    - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3@noahhoward
      Vista does add a bunch of extra Windows to the network interface... This is true. Perhaps it is something that you get used to... though I do think the layout of that particular interface is a bit more convoluted that it needs to be.
- vincentweber, on 02/26/2008, -6/+1I am sorry, Linux is now better at wireless. The only problem is that it doesn't have support for too many cards, so you have to buy a Linux compatible card, but you have to do that for Vista too, because there's a ***** of XP cards that don't work in Vista.
  
  Yeah yeah blah blah Linux fanboyism? Let's see... When was the last time you had a laptop that, when you plugged in your asus wireless PCMCIA network card and didn't had to install the drivers yourself, the network manager came up where you only had to select WPA2 and enter your code and it worked? Well I have a Dell laptop with a Asus card and Kubuntu 7.10 that does just that, out of the box, without modifying/installing some piece of software.
  
  Now you can digg me down because you holy believe in Vista, but you can't ignore the facts. So, haters, have a nice day. I am going to play some Counter-Strike: Source under Linux... on a laptop... wirelesly. Bye :)
  - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+4Sorry but you're ignoring some of the facts. And furthermore you seem to know it by the way you run aware after saying what you want.
    
    For those of you that agree with mister hit and run-before-any-one-can-point-out-my-hypocrisy. Vista supports pretty much any wireless card out there going back about 3 years. Linux doesn't. All you need is the latest drivers...
    - vincentweber, on 02/27/2008, -0/+0Oh yeah reeeeaaaaaly... like every company completely rebuilds their drivers from scratch so 3 year old wireless cards work under Vista.
      
      Two words: My ass.
      
      And even if they do, you need to:
      -download them
      -install them
      -reboot
      -set Vista to have wireless networking
      -set SSID's, etc
      
      In Kubuntu you just swap it in, it's plug-and-play, right-click on the network icon in the systray, select the network you want to connect to, enter the key and your ready to go. Seriously, get a clue.
- Litespeed, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1Ubuntu 7.10 found my Ralink-based wireless card out of the box and it even seems to work better than under Vista. I do feel sorry for laptop users though - I'm using a desktop so i can switch components as required to make it work.
  - vincentweber, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1My Asus PCMCIA wireless card works out of the box, plug-and-play on my Dell laptop.
thatdood, on 02/26/2008, -27/+9yawn
- sk11, on 02/26/2008, -5/+5That's right, go back to sleep, sleep, deep sleep.
  /bill gates
nnagflar, on 02/26/2008, -9/+130I use both. I love Linux when I'm hating Windows, and I love Windows when I'm hating Linux.
- fstorino, on 02/26/2008, -2/+52Dual-boot: the solution to OS bipolarity.
- FiP0, on 02/26/2008, -2/+13Truth itself.
- kozie, on 02/26/2008, -1/+18Honesty on digg FTW.
- buddyw, on 02/26/2008, -2/+11You whore.
- starsky51, on 02/26/2008, -7/+1but you hate Windows more, right? B )
- CCmachined, on 02/28/2008, -2/+1why would you hate Linux?
  companies that won't support Linux deserve your hate, not innocent Linux ;)
aajjcckk, on 02/26/2008, -43/+15
- estvir, on 02/26/2008, -8/+33> I suspect half of you Vista fanboys on Digg are unwilling to accept criticism of Microsoft because it's a big successful American company, and no other reason.
  
  Says the guy who think it's humanly impossible for someone to like Vista. Do you realise how utterly stupid and hypocritical you are?
  
  http://www.windows-now.com/blogs/robert/archive/20 ...
  http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=382
  
  For starters..
  - Fartag, on 02/26/2008, -4/+4I do think it's possible to like Vista too. But I agree with aajjcckk that if you become familiar with the benefits of running in a Linux environment that you'll be spoiled by it. At least it's true in my experience and _seems_ pretty common. Linux distros let you control your machine to the core, running an ever-evolving, easily accessible amoeba of incredibly powerful OSS software, with _no_ catches in sight. This is a highly potent lure and it hooks a significant proportion of people that try it long enough to realize some of the benefits laying everywhere in it.
    
    Also, the primary benefit in running Vista (versus Linux) comes from the vendors that currently target their software for the Windows platform. If Microsoft lost enough vendor exclusivity, then Microsoft as a monopoly in this field and Windows as the primary OS on PC desktops would halt quickly!
    - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3*dugg* Well said.
      
      Unfortunately I still disagree with the last part as that is a sort of Catch 22. You claim that if MS lost vender exclusivity they would lose their monopoly. This is absolutely true. The problem is that they will have to lose their monopoly to lose vender exclusivity.
      
      Another approach is needed... perhaps by convincing the novice user crowd to use linux... which as I've stated countless times else where means polishing the usability blemishes out of linux... as a start.
      
      Oh and not pissing all over the embedded devices market (where linux has maintained a lead for a while) might be a good idea too.
- mattmcm, on 02/26/2008, -1/+18I use Vista, and I have no problem with saying ***** Microsoft, ***** their closed standards and ***** Internet Explorer. I can use their OS without caring for them, as incredible as it may seem.
  - Waiting2awake, on 02/26/2008, -8/+2But the point I think is deeper than that. You bought vista - thus you have helped out MS - you haven't said "***** Microsoft" - you have said "Microsoft, ***** me" - because they have your money, and you have their DRM.
    
    Not nearly a fair trade, if it works for you then fine, but don't lie to yourself that you can say "***** microsoft" while you use their product. You have given them your money and you have made the net a little less secure.
    - Wartz, on 02/26/2008, -2/+6I just pirated it. I get my cake and get to eat it too, without surprise buttsex from MS.
      - Waiting2awake, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1But now you are a criminal. Why? And you still don't own your system thanks to its propriety-rights structure.
        
        Also, how do security patches get to you if you have it cracked? Can't they catch that?
    - mattmcm, on 02/26/2008, -1/+12Yes, I bought it. In that case, you can say what you wish. But DRM is a non issue. I can play every single music and video I've downloaded with no restrictions at all.
      
      If Vista gave me a message along the lines of "Access to this file has been blocked because it may contain illegal content," then there would be a point to your DRM statement. I don't use Media Player, and I have Business so Media Centre is also out.
      
      I haven't made the net any less secure. I'm not an average dumbass user. I don't click adverts saying "WOW FREE EMOTICONS!!" and I don't run executable files without checking them out first.
      - Fartag, on 02/26/2008, -1/+2Preventing copying the OS or long term use itself is DRM (WGA).
        
        Information from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_manage ...
        
        Vista contains PVP. "PVP tries to stop DRM-restricted content from playing while unsigned software is running in order to prevent the unsigned software from accessing the content."
        
        Also in terms of DRM overriding users' wishes example in "Windows Vista operating system in which content is disabled or degraded depending on the DRM scheme's evaluation of whether the hardware and its use are 'secure'"
        
        Either not using Microsoft software (Media Player, e.g.) or downloading media with stripped DRM still doesn't make this a non-issue to everybody!
        
        Microsoft has pursued DRM in its OS and on a number of other fronts already, but it's difficult to not support when buying most pre-built machines in the current market.
      - mattmcm, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2Probably too late to reply now, but anyway: my bad. I completely forgot about the hardware checking they had in place for HD content and the like. As such, feel free to bury me :/ I probably came off as an ignorant jerk there.
      - Noctem, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1Fartaq, guess what? Any OS that's going to want to play blu-ray media is going to require end-to-end DRM, including OS X.
        
        DRM in Vista does _not_ reduce system performance. It is completely inactive until you insert the appropriate DRM-enabled media.
      - Waiting2awake, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1as I said - you don't own your system. Why is it hard to understand that you should own your system - and you simply can not own it under the current structure. Open source may not be the best choice - but transparency is a good thing.
    - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -1/+4there is a difference between being pragmatic and being loyal.
      
      I still use windows on my main machine because I have, in my rather lengthy experience with both Linux (started on it when redhat 5 was out) and Windows (started working on it with Windows 95), noticed that Windows always has been and, based on my recent experiences with Ubuntu, still is more reliable and has less of a negative impact on my productivity (ease of use is better) than Linux when it is kept clean of spyware and crap. Yes I could avoid even having to worry about spyware if I used Linux but I have discovered that I can also avoid having to worry about it by just using Firefox as my browser and not mindlessly okaying every UAC prompt that pops up (or disabling it like some self righteous idiot).
      
      As for getting Vista rather than running XP... I'm a computer tech. It's not good form to wait till I'm working on some one's computer that has Vista on it to start learning it.
- garfonzo, on 02/26/2008, -1/+6What a pile of garbage. I started out using Unix and Linux “properly”, as you put it (comp sci majour). I loved working with them and then moved to OSX because of its FreeBSD backbone (seemed natural). I’ve since abandoned Apple and have switched to Vista because of my needs for a computer. Granted, I bought a new computer so Vista works great and I really enjoy it. I’ve enjoyed its look and feel and how it integrates into my home network. Ya, I had some bumps along the way to make things work smoothly, but as if that isn’t the case for any computer on the planet that needs to mingle with other computers.
  I actually feel more like supporting Microsoft because Mr. Gates seems like a genuinely good person. Mr. Jobs, however, seems like a slime ball. Now, Microsoft as a company has its deplorable aspects and sure, they’re a corporate machine that strives to make money and I am not a Microsoft fanboy. Just don’t be so narrow minded about people and throw everyone into specific categories. There are grey areas too.
  The only reason I’m not using Linux right now is because I can’t find a stupid driver for my printer and I’m not about to spend my time writing one, or buying a new printer. If I could find it, I think my server and my main comp would have Linux on them.
  - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -1/+3Oh yes, I almost forgot the hell I went through trying to get my ultra rare Lexmark X5150 printer (almost 5 years old now and one of the most common lexmark printers out there) to work on Ubuntu... heh,
    
    In the end I couldn't share the printer over the network either because of limitations in sambas implementation of printer sharing... so instead of hooking up my printer to my network server I had to hook it up directly to my main machine... which isn't always turned on/connected to the network.
    
    That was one of the straws the broke the camels back as it were and convinced me to give Windows 2003 Server a try.
    - marx2k, on 02/27/2008, -0/+0Or.. you know.. get a printer that isn't an equivalent of a WinModem
- Matt2k, on 02/26/2008, -1/+3Anyone that has this much passionate hatred for a ***** operating system is not worth replying to.
  
  ..*****.
sekhui, on 02/26/2008, -36/+103the irony of a linux user complaining about drivers... it's like a delicious, moist breakfast muffin covered in cut up pieces of livejournal.

now digg me down. the power of linus compels you!
- kingmanic, on 02/26/2008, -12/+6I fail to see the irony. It's not ironic for people to want support for their hardware whilst using a open source OS.
  - podgey22, on 02/26/2008, -2/+12Sigh. That's not what he was saying.
    It's ironic because a common Windows=>Linux convert complains about the lack of drivers available for things (eg WiFi drivers). The article writer was completely correct in that default Windows drivers often suck big ass, updated ones (via Windows Update) suck even harder and if the company that made your hardware disappears overnight (as some of the smaller Chinese outfits tend to at an alarming rate), you're left without any driver support and you have to scrounge around third-party, often virus-filled "driver sites".
    While it doesn't support enough hardware, the hardware that it *does* cater to, is much better supported.
    - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -3/+7"While it doesn't support enough hardware, the hardware that it *does* cater to, is much better supported."
      
      uhm only if you limit yourself to default drivers... I seriously doubt any one here is gonna claim that third party linux drivers do a better job at supporting most wifi cards, video cards, sound cards, network cards, raid controllers, sata controllers, mice, keyboards, drawing tablets, etc than the 1st party manufacturer driver on windows. That's just ridiculous.
      
      Oh and if the company that made your hardware disappears there are numerous resources to find drivers... far more than if the same happened on linux.
    - wolferz, on 02/26/2008, -1/+4amazing, I'm getting dugg down for stating the obvious... ***** fanboys must have just arrived...
    - marx2k, on 02/27/2008, -0/+0Well, in Linux, the drivers are in the repos. If the hardware manufacturer's site is down, looking for Windows drivers to hardware to be installed in a 50+MB black box installation can get quite annoying.
  - adizzy615, on 02/26/2008, -0/+7Are you implying that Linux drivers are better quality drivers than window drivers?
    In my experience most linux drivers doesn't support all the bells and whistles of the target hardware.
    - FutureGuy, on 02/26/2008, -1/+2he is imp-lying.
- Waiting2awake, on 02/26/2008, -9/+22Hey buddy, right now I am trying to get an older scanner working in XP - it is plug and play with Linux and I have spent the last hour finding drivers and frontends for it. Same with my camera, my printers, and just about everything else I have ever had the occasion to try between the two systems.
  
  At least as far as I have seen myself, this idea that Linux lacks drivers is mainly a myth, like so much FUD.
  - thugok, on 02/26/2008, -6/+11Quit buying ***** hardware and your driver issues will disappear.
    - TheZorch, on 02/26/2008, -8/+3Uh, excuse me but sometimes famous brand name ***** has driver problems in Windows. How about the Zune, remember the nightmare users faced with that P.O.S. Plug a device into Linux and it just works, there are plenty of drivers for devices or services that can run devices in Linux. Even my USB sound card works in Ubuntu.
      - TheG2, on 02/26/2008, -0/+4My Zune setup was probably the easiest MP3 related install I've ever done.
      - bejayel, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2I wish my X-FI worked in linux :(. Given that is the fault of creative for not releasing the specs.
    - marx2k, on 02/27/2008, -0/+0Lexmark does not condone your statement
    - Waiting2awake, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1Right - HP.....keep on trolling.
  - ryodoan, on 02/26/2008, -1/+9Great, now maybe you can get my sound card working with surround sound, my internal WiFi or external USB WIfi card installed, whichever, and then you can instruct me on the fine art of somehow magically getting Triple monitor support.
    
    Then, after you do all that, I want to be able to use Linux on one of my older computers, but it uses a PCI video card. Good luck with that one, I have spent 2 years on and off trying to get that one to work.
    
    Oh, yeah, and all that stuff works perfectly under windows with minimal hassle. Finally, all those things listed are just the problems I have had that i can think of off the top of my head.
  - HPMNick, on 02/26/2008, -0/+5No, its very true. Windows XP has superior driver support compared to Vista or Linux.
    
    I think there are a lot of "new" users to Linux. I've been playing with it on and off for the past 8-10 years... and for some time now it has been a very poor choice for general use. Ubuntu has made some steps to improve that, and its getting there... but there are still some complex problems that need to be overcome.
    
    I still do most of my work in Windows, namely because thats the type of environment found in corporations... There are however, a lot of very nice niches found in Linux. From security testing, to dedicated servers, to fun custom stuff you can't do with any other operating system...
    
    Getting back to my point though... this is not a myth.. Linux still does not support a lot of hardware. Its really not the fault of the operating system though.. There were a ton of sound cards, modems, LAN controllers, etc etc. Its hard for the community to code for them all.
    - effedup, on 02/26/2008, -0/+2Very well said.
    - Waiting2awake, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1You can say what you will, but there is still this scanner that took a total of 3 hours to deal with on XP and it is just plug and play on Linux. With the exception of wireless devices, that has been my experience with printers, cameras, scanners, etc.
      
      I understand why it is important to say these things, I I do agree that Linux is not for people that do not want to solve issues themselves - however - unless you are going to solve issues yourself - you can not say you own your system because you are at the mercy of tech support, because even if you had the skill to fix things - thanks to the propriety-rights software limit what you can do with your own system.
      - HPMNick, on 02/27/2008, -0/+0I don't disagree with the advantages of Linux. I use it a lot for security auditing, and Windows gives you no low level control... which is why you need to use linux for a lot of this stuff...
        
        As far as hardware compatibility goes, its really up to the manufacturers or the community to supply the necessary drivers. I'm sure you can find a lot of examples of something not working well on both... Some old hardware that required drivers to have low level controls simply will not work with some newer versions of windows. Uncommon or widely varied types of sound, network or modem devices may have issues in Linux.
        
        I've done a lot of linux installs, and some distributions (at different times) have been much better than others. I remember installing SuSe in like 1999, and it failed to install on one computer and simply didn't work well on several other computers. Things have changed a lot since then.
        
        Newer versions and distributions do a much better job... but like I said, its not really their fault. Manufacturers mainly support the windows platform, and this is why a lot of devices had issues on linux
    - CCmachined, on 02/28/2008, -1/+2Linux still does not support a lot of hardware < buried
      you mean "a lot of hardware still does not support Linux" =]
  - roebeet, on 02/26/2008, -0/+6My experience with drivers in Ubuntu is..... it depends. Linux, and Ubuntu in particular, is very "it either works immediately, or you have to create your own module via a long drawn process via numerous forums". My MP3 players, Wireless keyboard / mouse (from MS, no less), wireless, LAN connections, LG cellphones, and webcam all "just work". But I've also heard horror stories with other hardware, mainly because there is no driver download, or support, from the manufacturer. It's usually newer and uncommon hardware that can burn you.
    
    Windows, on the other hand, is more in the middle. Unless the driver is built into the OS, you still have to go through the headache of installing drivers. But, it's not as painful a process as Linux can be. Older hardware is potentially a problem if there's no MS driver and if the manufacturer does not have a driver for the latest OS you're running.
    - marx2k, on 02/27/2008, -1/+0Spoken like a man who hasn't had much experience with the "Found New Hardware, Install Hardware Automatically?", "Found New Hardware, Install Hardware Automatically?" fun fun circles in XP
      - roebeet, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1Dealt with it for many years, actually. From my experience, as long as you have the driver software from the manufacturer and use their instructions, it's generally not too difficult. I stress "generally" - there are exceptions, of course. I've seen the problem you mentioned - my last few sound cards were like that, as I recall.
      - HPMNick, on 02/27/2008, -0/+0I'm not sure I know what circles you mean... If you have the correct drivers, you can either automatically install or manually install...
- dusanmal, on 02/26/2008, -3/+11Driver situation in Linux have improved dramatically over the years and support for year-or-older hardware is essentially at 100% nowadays. Remaining problems are mostly caused by intentional bad practices by the manufacturers (with MS blessings?).
  On Windows side situation is almost exactly opposite. Up to the Vista it would be unimaginable to have unsupported hardware. However, the main problem of Vista is in the driver support, particularly for year-or-older hardware... Vista is the first MS OS I haven't switched to within few months (and I tried it) as most of my valuable hardware (high-end digital camera, good web-cam, high-end printer,...) is not supported. And some "supported" and trivial devices barely worked with frequent disabling problems (BSOD) (ex. DVDRW drive). And, while manufacturers have some fingerprints in Vista drivers problems the main issue is in the MS design so the problem is unlikely to improve fast enough.
  So, yes - the irony - but not in a sense sekhui have implied.
  - spoolboyy, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1yes. everything older works...except my onboard sound in my extremely "rare" Dell laptop.
  - FutureGuy, on 02/26/2008, -3/+2Ohh ya blame MS for lack of Linux drivers, and that "?" is classic. Get a life sucker.
- jabberwolf, on 02/26/2008, -8/+2Getting drivers to actually work in linux simple...first
  You need an old priest and a young priest...
- Megatog615, on 02/26/2008, -0/+7God, I hate it when people say "now digg me down " after their comments, expecting themselves to be dugg up. It's the epitome of egotism. Therefor I must digg you down. You asked for it.
XarCrius, on 02/26/2008, -37/+14I have to use Linux for work... Man, I wish they'll just give me Windows...
Want something installed on Windows, double click it!
Want something installed in Linux, terminal, chmod, sh, then apt-get...
I wonder who wins the award for usability access...
- SuperSneaks, on 02/26/2008, -7/+27Want something installed on Linux sudo apt-get install ...
  
  There, I fixed it for you.
- mykool, on 02/26/2008, -9/+34When I want something installed on linux Ubuntu I just go to add/remove put a check mark besdie what I want installed - take the check mark if I want uninstalled and it's done. In windows if I remember right it's - dubble click the icon - wait for the splash screen to turn off and then tell it yes I would like to install a program, then it has to go on the internet to d/ld the latest windows installer app, then it has to ask about 4 or 5 questions and then I have to agree to some amazingly one sided EULA.
  
  I don't even want to get into what it takes to "completely" remove and uninstall an app in windows and what it does do to the registry when you do.
  - drunkinbda, on 02/26/2008, -6/+3lol... dubble click?? k when trying to make an educated point about how somethign is too hard... being able to click "check spelling" is a good start..
    
    anyway.. so ya.. double click (seems hard), wait for splash screen (omg i have to wait 5 seconds), click yes (too much effort), it has to go to d/l the latest installer app (its called keeping it up to date, linux does it too), and then 4 or 5 questions ... and some amazingly one sided eula??? basically saying "dont steal this"... ???
    
    its funny how fanboys can stretch things so far.. just click add/remove in linux eh? sure after you install it, have conflicts, get variables setup right, mount drives ok, edit config files, yada yada etc etc. just stfu and realize that linux is hard for windows users, and windows is hard for linux users. Both think the other sucks and thats just life. there is no one that is better and simpler than the other or else everyone would have it..
    
    suck it up
    - stevemcjones, on 02/26/2008, -3/+2Sorry, this comment just made you look like a complete idiot.
      
      Face it: Managing applications under Linux is far easier than under Windows.
      Please inform yourself before posting such a fanboy-nonsense again.
      
      A good start would be "package manager".
- TheRealToma, on 02/26/2008, -5/+22Its also a nice simple double-click to install a virus too.
  - drunkinbda, on 02/26/2008, -5/+2so make the computer complicated enough that the user cant do anything? sounds like a good fix
- FiP0, on 02/26/2008, -1/+17don't feed the trolls.
- bumblefoot, on 02/26/2008, -4/+19what's hard exactly about Sudo apt-get?
  or using a package manager?
  - lynx44, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3How about when the program you want isn't in the package manager? Then you have to compile from source and find all the dependencies. Or when you have repository conflicts. It CAN be a real pain, or it can be the easiest thing in the world. I wish that Linux programs would always offer the option of downloading a "complete" package that has all the dependencies included. It can be hell trying to get something set up from source, which happens every once in a while when no one has precompiled it for your distro.
    - marx2k, on 02/27/2008, -0/+0Most of the software you need is available in the repositories. If not, the source of the software tends to have downloads for it in deb, rpm or whatever form. I've had to compile from source once in the past year. And then it ended up being on the repo's anyway.
      - lynx44, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1Yeah, but its those few applications that really frustrate users. The fact that most software is in a repo doesn't help me when the one application I want isn't available. Even if it shows up later, sometimes you can't wait and just hope it will show up. I do agree that the repo's do a pretty great job of providing just about anything you want though.
- HugeAlReturns, on 02/26/2008, -9/+15Want something installed on Vista - go to shop, shell out exorbitant amount of money, come home, install over next 2 hours. Find out a "Vista Capable" PC can't run the software. Start class-action lawsuit. While waiting for a decision, buy a new PC. Install Linux. Open Synaptic. Click Install.
  For Linux skip all but the last two steps.
  - Viriatus2, on 02/26/2008, -2/+4there is free software to Vista and there is also many software that Linux can't run...and there is a lot of software that isn't available in Synaptic and you have to compile it yourself and solve dependencies which is really annoying, in Windows you just google it, download it, double-click, next-next-next and that's it....
    - HugeAlReturns, on 02/26/2008, -2/+0And before you know it, there are porn popups all over your screen
      - bjornski, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1Are you really that bad at using computers that you can't avoid that?
      - HugeAlReturns, on 02/27/2008, -0/+0No, but the rest of my family is, and I'm the one who has to sort it out,
    - marx2k, on 02/27/2008, -0/+0Hhaha in Windows it's more like google it, download it, click next-next-next, find out it's shareware, google the crack, get the crack which is an exe, run the exe, gain supervirus-maximus, find out it didn't crack the program, try to uninstall the program and then spend the next 15 to 30 minutes trying to uninstall the program, reboot , come back into a desk top with 50 pop-ups and your bandwidth diminished because it's being taken up by resident programs phoning home or worse, then going back on google and going back to step one
- sk11, on 02/26/2008, -2/+4Update linux: apt-get update; apt-get upgrade.
  Install on linux: apt-get update; apt-get install program.
  Easy street.
  - drunkinbda, on 02/26/2008, -3/+4riiight.... until some program isnt installed right or conflicts and you get some confusing error that means absolutely nothing to you.
    
    mac, linux, windows... of all of them then one person i hate most if fanboys. they think everything is so easy cause they are used to it... plain and simple.
    
    I remember one article where the linux fanboys were sayin how easy it was to install WoW on linux. they said install wine, configure this file, edit this setting, mount this drive, put the cd in, install and you're done.... never mentioned that the vista install requires putting the CD in and just hitting next or ok till its done...
    
    lol install apt-get etc etc..sureif you got the right distro.. if not then its something else.. want to fix the prob on YOUR computer... gotta find linux help, and then filter that to find your distro.. not as simple as it seems
    - mcochran, on 02/26/2008, -1/+1Wait, so it's easier to install Windows programs on Windows than it is on Linux? Shocking!
    - sk11, on 02/26/2008, -1/+1Aptitude takes care of things like conflicts. Errors in linux are usually useful messages which you can then google or ask about in helpful forums/irc channels. MS errors are usually of the type: "error 345765 occurred, send report?", i.e. unhelpful to say the least.
- dulymachine, on 02/26/2008, -4/+6gentoo > *
  - bejayel, on 02/26/2008, -1/+3Portage is the god of all package managers. Recently converted two classmates from ubuntu to gentoo and they say they have no idea how they used a linux distrobution without portage.
- bowens44, on 02/26/2008, -3/+3Install in linux, select app from list click process que. pretty easy.
- Stonekeeper, on 02/26/2008, -1/+1"I wish I was a real boy!"
estvir, on 02/26/2008, -13/+55Wow, 4 months and that rubbish 'article' is all he could get out?
- daftman, on 02/26/2008, -1/+2probably there's nothing else interesting to talk about
- Stonekeeper, on 02/26/2008, -4/+2It's not his fault. He used the default Vista productivity tools.
- nailer, on 02/27/2008, -1/+2What's rubbish about it?
  - nailer, on 02/27/2008, -0/+1Sorry for asking someone to provide supporting statements rather than merely an unjustified opinion. I'm clearly deserving of a bury there.
gcauthon, on 02/26/2008, -36/+23"I can’t figure out how to set up simple keyboard shortcuts to launch apps"
Right click on a shortcut and click "properties". See the little box named "shortcut key"? If you can't figure it out from there, you're retarded.

"It’s what it is, and nothing more."
And Linux is more than what it is?

"What? I can’t run old versions of Microsfot SQL Server on Vista?"
You run old versions of Microsoft SQL Server on Linux?

"Absolutely no package management"
*****. http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa372866. ...

"Lack of good cmdline tools"
*****. http://cygwin.com/

"Lack of a good SSH Client"
*****. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/
- dualscreenman, on 02/26/2008, -4/+18If you read the article, he had trouble getting cygwin working in Vista.
  Oh, and your MSDN link is broken.
  - gcauthon, on 02/26/2008, -16/+6He also had trouble creating a shortcut... what does that tell you? Why would a Linux user choose Vista in the first place, if not to intentionally choose something that he knows would fail? If he actually wanted to try a version of Windows that works then he would have chosen XP.
    
    You didn't address the whole SQL Server thing either. Why would a Linux user want to use SQL Server? The last time I checked, that's not the only database that runs on Windows. And I'm pretty sure it doesn't run on Linux.
    
    As for the broken link, not my fault. Obviously, the period at the end was not supposed to be part of the hyperlink.
    - ThePet, on 02/26/2008, -5/+13He did not have trouble creating a shortcut... did you read the article at all?
      
      As for the SQL Server issue, uhhh... what? Who cares if it's not the only database that runs on windows. The point is that Microsofts OWN software can't run on Microsoft's OWN operating system.
      
      And to your point of Linux being more than what it is... That's it exactly! Linux is not just what it is and nothing more. That's the whole point of this OpenSource thing that you might have heard of?
    - Matt2k, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3> He did not have trouble creating a shortcut... did you read the article at all?
      Shortcut KEY. did you even read the article at all?
      
      > The point is that Microsofts OWN software can't run on Microsoft's OWN operating system.
      Can you run all Linux apps from 10 years ago on a current kernel?
- bzaks, on 02/26/2008, -5/+14Man, He didn't even read the whole article!
  1) Windows Installer is clunky at best, with 4-5 questions most users don't even read, they just click "next"
  2) Cygwin, already taken care of...
  3) Once again, putty was not good enough for him.
  4) Why would a linux user pick vista except to the fact that he was curious? If you had read the whole article, you would've noticed that he did point out some positives about Vista....
  5) SQL Server is a MS product, one would think that they would be intercompatible, no? Besides, MS SQL Server is not a bad app. So why wouldn't you want to use it?
  Jeesh.... why am I feeding the troll?
- ThePet, on 02/26/2008, -2/+11I just tired to install Firefox through this global package management suggestion you linked... I can't figure out how though? Care to explain?
  
  And shortcut keys on shortcuts work maybe 10% of the time.
- andycr512, on 02/26/2008, -5/+17"You run old versions of Microsoft SQL Server on Linux?"
  
  -1 Irrelevant.
  
  "*****. http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa372866. ..."
  
  Add .aspx to the end of that URL and you get a sick joke. That isn't package management. We had that... Oh, about 12 years ago. Read up on what a package manager can do and call us back when you can open an application, check off an application from the tens of thousands listed, and have it download and install it for you automatically - no questions, no hassles, no CD keys.
  
  "*****. http://cygwin.com/"
  
  Read the article. He said it didn't work. Secondly, Cygwin is a sad hack to make an OS with a terrible terminal into an OS with a decent terminal, and after it all, you're still running on Windows.
  
  "*****. http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/"
  
  Do people even read these days? Putty didn't work either. Is it too much to ask for you to read the article you're criticizing?
  - bejayel, on 02/26/2008, -1/+1I use putty and it works great. I love using putty to make ssh tunnels home from school so i can browse whatever the ***** i want at school and work.
- digggggggggg, on 02/26/2008, -3/+16You know, people will take you more seriously when you don't resort to calling people 'retarded' and their arguments '*****'.
  
  Just something I'd thought I'd let you in on.
  - sk11, on 02/26/2008, -1/+6His use of these terms actually helps explain a lot about him.
- mattmcm, on 02/26/2008, -3/+8Windows Installer isn't a package manager in the same way as Synaptic is. Give me a buzz when they release a package manager capable of installing software by having me select checkboxes and hit Apply.
- theOster, on 02/26/2008, -0/+3why hasn't anyone told him about launchy? the hell with shortcuts...
jtbndy, on 02/26/2008, -56/+123His GUI complaints are retarded. Couldn't map a shortcut key in 4 months? I did it in 4 seconds.

Backwards compatibility works fine for me.

Driver issues? With an OS that supports 10 times the amount of things Linux supports of course you're going to have to do a little bit of driver searching. Grow a brain, go to the product website, and download. Its not ***** brain surgery.

Digg me down, but this is just a typical Linux user review of Vista.
- ThePet, on 02/26/2008, -15/+34I love how when ever anybody disagrees with someone on digg the word "retard" is used.
  
  Try your shortcut key out for a week. You'll find that most of the time it fails.
  
  And it wasn't a review of Vista, it was an attempt to share how a Linux user got comfortable in Windows. so :-P
  - MacSuxWindozSux, on 02/26/2008, -6/+1Actually its "tard" that is used.
    
    Retard
    Paultard
    Mactard
    etc
    
    I'm not insulting anyone I'm just telling you what people are saying.
  - bejayel, on 02/26/2008, -1/+2All that and, linux supports 10 times the devices vista supports easily.except for my X-FI (yes, i am pretty bitter about it)
- mgromer, on 02/26/2008, -6/+16Yeah, I have no idea how you could have issues with hardware drivers with anything but some obscure hardware lol I've been running Vista for a year now on multiple computers with no issues.
  - wiresjr, on 02/28/2008, -0/+1If you actually laughed out loud half way through that sentence, you're either deranged, or something hilarious is happening in another window. Which, please?
- erikerikerik, on 02/26/2008, -14/+8I would have to agree with jt. creating short cuts takes no time at all, and with the power of google search you can find any number of tinny files to help you along.
  
  aaaaaaand "Absolutely no package management" add/remove programs? maybe?
  - cawpin, on 02/26/2008, -7/+13Ass/Remove programs is NOT a package manager. A PM would have access to all, or at least most, of the packages available for an OS. When I type "firefox" into any Linux PM I get results in seconds. I don't have to go manually download the program and then install it.

Linux user in Vista land.

submitted by

What is Digg?

Top in Linux/Unix

Antivirus Fail thumb

Linux Symposium Statistics: T-Shirt Sizethumb

Linux-based HP Mini Mi ships with command line disabledthumb

All of Vietnam's Government Computers To Use Linuxl

New Freescale processors target Linux netbooks

gOS 3.1thumb

gOS Gadgets aims Ubuntu at cloud computingthumb

submitted by

What is Digg?

Top in Linux/Unix

Related by Keyword