Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate
Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.
Analysts Say Vista Will "Collapse," Yahoo Deal Must Happen
techcrunch.com — Gartner analysts Michael Silver and Neil MacDonald told a conference audience yesterday that Microsoft ’s Windows product is collapsing and must make radical changes to its operating system or risk becoming a has-been.
Blakovitch- 1377 diggs
- digg it
- Philluminati, on 04/12/2008, -32/+185
Those who do not understand UNIX are condemned to re-implement it poorly!- Zaneris, on 04/12/2008, -26/+13I see Linux becoming more popular as well now amongst home users with the current rate of development, not to mention that the eye-candy that will win them over is starting to really look great. http://digg.com/linux_unix/Awesome_3D_Linux_Deskto ...
Now if only they would make it easier for new users to figure out how to turn it on...- Stonekeeper, on 04/12/2008, -3/+20I just don't know whether to digg you up or digg you down. You state some true facts then end it with an idiotic comment.
Edit: You mean turn on compiz? i thought you meant turn on linux. heh. It's on by default in popular distros. - HigherLogic, on 04/12/2008, -8/+44Please step outside your basement for a moment and talk to your average person about computers. Then, after you've done that, come back and tell me how Linux will now become popular amongst home users. Quite the pipe dream. Look, I love *nix in all its flavors. As a web developer, it's my only choice. But as far as the desktop market goes, you're vastly underestimating (and failing to understand) the average user, what they know, what they want, and what they can do. But you did hit the nail on the head, at least partially: if they could only make it easier for new users to figure it out. That's quite a challenge considering how much support a product like Windows has.
- Zaneris, on 04/12/2008, -7/+3I'll say you're right, yes, in general most people won't be using it anytime soon, but there's still plenty of people/users quite capable of switching to linux that either don't know enough about it or how the distros work, etc... these are the people that can learn to use it and give some more market share over to the open source side.
Even if the change is only by a percent, that's a huge increase. - smacksaw, on 04/12/2008, -11/+7OSX is a 'nix...the Eee PC is a 'nix. A simplified version of Linux that is impossible to mess up...like Apple gives us, you think people don't want that?
- BlackCow, on 04/12/2008, -5/+2The only problem with OSX is you can't install it on any other computer except apple's. That leaves no hardware competition and thus over priced hardware. My bet is on Ubuntu working to become more and more user friendly and being able to emulate windows .exe really well. That or maybe MS will make their next OS unix based lol.
- ishkur88, on 04/12/2008, -4/+3you've never heard of OSx86 have you ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osx86
- houndeyex, on 04/12/2008, -2/+6In addition, it isn't always just "figuring" it out. I'm sure I could learn Linux fine, but there's software packages that I need for work. Dreamweaver, Visual Studio, etc... I don't have much of a desire to run Linux out of pure spite for Microsoft, and Dual-Booting can be a pain and in my opinion is waste of hard drive space. If I'm already running Windows and have to continue to run Windows, then why should I run Linux and have it installed on my machine? In my experience there's been far fewer things that I can only do on Linux as compared to the things I tend to do in Windows. If one will do it all, that's probably what I'll be sticking with. Vendor driven software isn't really a bad thing. It helps drive support.
- theaceoffire, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2Programs written for Windows and Linux tend to support a LOT more hardware/OS's than programs written explicitly on flaws/tricks of a single OS. They also tend to be more stable when the target OS upgrades.
If you don't want to run an updated, user supported OS that is fine. But there are good, solid reasons to do it other than just to Spite Microsoft.
It is more stable, able to run for months and years without issues or slowdown, it is secure, it allows easy software installation and removal. It works not only out of the box, but off the cd itself with 80-90% of what the average user needs to get work done. - supermanred, on 04/12/2008, -1/+1I switched to UNIX (OS X) and I can run Windows Vista at the same time, in parallels which I keep in my bottom right Spaces window. It takes me half a second to pop over to windows vista...
- houndeyex, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1...and it runs like total poop.
- theaceoffire, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2Programs written for Windows and Linux tend to support a LOT more hardware/OS's than programs written explicitly on flaws/tricks of a single OS. They also tend to be more stable when the target OS upgrades.
- HigherLogic, on 04/12/2008, -2/+7Exactly, houndeyex. Whether you have Linux or use Apple, 99% of the time you're running an emulator. For most people, it's a "why bother" scenario. Why would I run Linux when I would have to emulate Windows to use programs that I need that aren't available. Sure, there are alternatives. I could tell you to use Open Office instead of Microsoft Office, but that's just not an option for most people.
You summed it up nicely though with this line:
"[T]here's been far fewer things that I can only do on Linux as compared to the things I tend to do in Windows."
And that's why the average user isn't switching. The same applies to Internet Explorer if you really want to drive the point home. Why would most people switch to Firefox, when IE does the basic things they need. Most people don't need an alternative that does everything they're already using does, even if it's more beneficial.- bradleyland, on 04/12/2008, -2/+2In a bubble, free from viruses and malware, you'd be correct, but there are driving forces that offset the inertia that Windows enjoys. The convenience of a system people are used to is being offset by the inconvenience of constant attacks on a system that was improperly designed from the beginning. The "why bother" question is answered by the constant annoyance of malware infections, or in the case of Vista, an operating system with so many quirks that users are simply fed up. If they're facing the learning curve of a new operating system "why bother" with a vendor that hasn't exactly treated you the best in the past?
*Cue the citation of the recent hacker convention where OS X went down first*
The point is not that OS X or Linux may, or may not, be just as insecure as Windows, but that people's _perception_ is that they are more secure. We are, by and large, pragmatists. Linux and OS X users don't complain constantly about malware/virus infections, so the public will believe that OS X and Linux are more secure. The underlying structure and design principles of these operating systems do not matter; only the experience matters.
As to the argument that you'll be using an emulator "99% of the time", I'd simply say that this is a problem that will solve itself. Office is already available for OS X, and if there is a sufficient market place for it, a suitable piece of software will arise for Linux as well. Some would say that OpenOffice is already that solution. I'd say that OO is very, very close, but not there yet.
Others point to vertical integration apps, and this is the stronghold that will fall the slowest, but it will fall. As enterprise faces the rising cost of maintaining Windows, and as users become more accustomed to alternatives, the opportunity for a Linux or OS X based solution grows larger. If things continue as indicated by current trends, there is nothing that makes me believe we won't see applications crop up for specific market verticals that are based on a variety of platforms. As more and more applications move the the web (as a platform), this barrier becomes even lower.
Change is afoot.
- bradleyland, on 04/12/2008, -2/+2In a bubble, free from viruses and malware, you'd be correct, but there are driving forces that offset the inertia that Windows enjoys. The convenience of a system people are used to is being offset by the inconvenience of constant attacks on a system that was improperly designed from the beginning. The "why bother" question is answered by the constant annoyance of malware infections, or in the case of Vista, an operating system with so many quirks that users are simply fed up. If they're facing the learning curve of a new operating system "why bother" with a vendor that hasn't exactly treated you the best in the past?
- Zaneris, on 04/12/2008, -2/+3But WHY is it that those apps are only available for Windows? Simply because more people are using it, cost-effective. So, even if you like the idea of linux, or just have a thing for a certain distro, install it as a secondary os. With enough of a user base, developers will start releasing more and more apps for linux as well, similar to how MS ported Office to Mac.
Also, the average user checks their email, maybe types up a letter, about it... so they're not really missing out on any of their apps, simply show them where to open Writer and Firefox and they're set. - lamiaconfitor, on 04/12/2008, -4/+3to higher logic... most people I know use Firefox, and Im not talking to techies exclusivly. I only know one person who uses their own personal computer that uses IE... how do you explain that?
- ichbeineinrcg, on 04/12/2008, -0/+4That you don't know many people?
I don't know anyone who uses Firefox or Safari. When I check blog statistics, 95% of the people who visit are IE. - HigherLogic, on 04/12/2008, -0/+5ichbeineinrcg took the words out of my mouth. None of my friends know what Firefox is. They all use Internet Explorer. If I asked them what Safari or Opera was, they'd say the same thing too. If I asked them what Linux was, they would have no clue. My parents don't know what Firefox is either.
My point remains, you're failing to understand the average user, and your friends apparently aren't the average user. If they've heard of Digg, they're not the average user. If they know what it means to be Rick Rolled, they're not the average user. If they know what a lolcat is, they're not the average user.
- ichbeineinrcg, on 04/12/2008, -0/+4That you don't know many people?
- Zaneris, on 04/12/2008, -7/+3I'll say you're right, yes, in general most people won't be using it anytime soon, but there's still plenty of people/users quite capable of switching to linux that either don't know enough about it or how the distros work, etc... these are the people that can learn to use it and give some more market share over to the open source side.
- Zaneris, on 04/12/2008, -6/+3Lmao! I guess I should've been more specific about that.
- Zaneris, on 04/12/2008, -5/+3About me referring to compiz...
- KMartSheriff, on 04/12/2008, -1/+5You don't know when to stop, do you?
- Stonekeeper, on 04/12/2008, -3/+20I just don't know whether to digg you up or digg you down. You state some true facts then end it with an idiotic comment.
- sadGuru, on 04/12/2008, -9/+8if an Active Directory-like product comes out for Unix based operating systems then Windows will definitely fall.
- smacksaw, on 04/12/2008, -7/+15That's like saying if Nissan could adopt the reliability of 1980's GM and Chrysler vehicles, the Toyota Prius' batteries would be obsolete.
- wageslaven, on 04/12/2008, -1/+1Excuse me? Acitve Directory is the single greatest boon to network object managment we've ever seen, the only thing remotely competitive is (very arguably) LDAP and Zen.
Dont fool yourselves, AD is exceptional and well worth the time to understand.
- wageslaven, on 04/12/2008, -1/+1Excuse me? Acitve Directory is the single greatest boon to network object managment we've ever seen, the only thing remotely competitive is (very arguably) LDAP and Zen.
- zoom1928, on 04/12/2008, -3/+11As a user of yellow pages from Sun for almost 20 years, I have to disagree with your statement. Yellow pages came-out long before Windows NT was even started.
- cplusplus, on 04/12/2008, -6/+11LDAP is the open equivalent...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightweight_Directory ...- nailer, on 04/12/2008, -0/+7Er, no. AD is an LDAP server that's also a Kerberos Key Distribution center. Unlike normal LDAP auth, Kerberos auth gives you an initial session key when you log in that can be used to authenticate to get keys that authenticate to other apps (eg, checking your mail, connecting to shares) - so your identity can be checked without you needing to re-enter the password.
Yes it's LDAP, but its much more. I think Samba 4 has an OSS implementation tho.
- nailer, on 04/12/2008, -0/+7Er, no. AD is an LDAP server that's also a Kerberos Key Distribution center. Unlike normal LDAP auth, Kerberos auth gives you an initial session key when you log in that can be used to authenticate to get keys that authenticate to other apps (eg, checking your mail, connecting to shares) - so your identity can be checked without you needing to re-enter the password.
- TrevorBradley, on 04/12/2008, -8/+17If DirectX for Linux were developed, Windows would fall.
There are two places Windows is still used: in the office, and for gaming. There's not much excuse to not switch over for the first reason at this point.- maninalift, on 04/12/2008, -1/+5I will repeat what I said on a Digg article just a couple of days ago. The key is making a platform attractive for developers - directX and the .NET framework do that. KDE is trying to do the same though not in was that directly compete with either (and wisely realizing that you need your libraries need to be cross-platform because on the whole commercial developers are not going to write for UNIX only).
- wageslaven, on 04/12/2008, -1/+1"The key is making a platform attractive for developers"
The key is making the platform maintainable. Making someone upstream respsonible for support. Someone you can rely on to be the expert. Having a single entity that can help you care for most of your systems, that is what the enterprise cares about in IT.
Consumers dont spend anything on IT compared to corporate entities.
- wageslaven, on 04/12/2008, -1/+1"The key is making a platform attractive for developers"
- djchester, on 04/12/2008, -2/+12or if the gaming industry would move back to OpenGL and make it easier..
- maninalift, on 04/12/2008, -1/+5I will repeat what I said on a Digg article just a couple of days ago. The key is making a platform attractive for developers - directX and the .NET framework do that. KDE is trying to do the same though not in was that directly compete with either (and wisely realizing that you need your libraries need to be cross-platform because on the whole commercial developers are not going to write for UNIX only).
- nixfu, on 04/12/2008, -2/+15>if an Active Directory-like product comes out for Unix based operating systems then Windows will definitely fall.
News Flash... AD = LDAP + Kerberos...its not rocket science and it was all around and being used in large orgs LONG before Microsoft had the idea.- maninalift, on 04/12/2008, -0/+4AD is Microsoft's implementation of LDAP. I am really know nothing about this area but as a simple user I have found it loads easier to set up networks, share folders, manage access privileges, share desktops etc on Linux than windows. Perhaps I am missing the point completely.
- bradleyland, on 04/12/2008, -0/+3I don't think you've missed the point, but you may not be operating within the same scope. Setting up AD is a "Next, next, next" operation in Windows. Setting up LDAP + Kerberos authentication in a *nix environment is a "man, man, man" operation. You really have to know what you're doing to implement an AD-like environment in *nix.
- maninalift, on 04/12/2008, -0/+4AD is Microsoft's implementation of LDAP. I am really know nothing about this area but as a simple user I have found it loads easier to set up networks, share folders, manage access privileges, share desktops etc on Linux than windows. Perhaps I am missing the point completely.
- Phisolo, on 04/12/2008, -1/+6OSX Server has Open Directory. It is Unix based, and it can integrate with Active Directory or replace it.
- bradleyland, on 04/12/2008, -1/+2More details about Kerberos in OS X:
http://developer.apple.com/opensource/kerberosintr ...
A lot of people don't even know this stuff exists. It's all based on OSS as well, so there is absolutely nothing tying this type of solution to OS X. - wageslaven, on 04/12/2008, -1/+1That doesnt make sense. Open Directory is LDAP, just the marketing name for it.
- bradleyland, on 04/12/2008, -1/+2More details about Kerberos in OS X:
- smacksaw, on 04/12/2008, -7/+15That's like saying if Nissan could adopt the reliability of 1980's GM and Chrysler vehicles, the Toyota Prius' batteries would be obsolete.
- doObz, on 04/12/2008, -6/+24as of 10.5, osx is "unix".
- astrosmash, on 04/12/2008, -3/+12The first and best Unix desktop, since 1989.
- Foxehh, on 04/12/2008, -2/+4Mac OS X 10.5 IS UNIX. See for yourself...http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2007/08/ ...
- yodaj007, on 04/12/2008, -1/+3That is EXACTLY what doObz said. Dude, read the article you yourself posted:
"One of the big draws of OS X has always been the UNIX-like, BSD heritage of the operating system. Apple has always touted OS X as UNIX-based and played up the security, stability, and compatibility that comes with the BSD foundation. The company has also gotten in some trouble with The Open Group over Apple's use of the UNIX name, when in fact OS X wasn't actually UNIX-certified. All that is changing, though, =======since the upcoming Leopard release has received the UNIX 03 certification (PDF) as of May 18, meaning that Mac OS X 10.5 on the Intel platform is a "true" UNIX OS, rather than just being UNIX-like.=======" - sovietninja, on 04/12/2008, -0/+3yodaj007: Foxehh was just removing any uncertainty that "unix" implies by using CAPS.
- yodaj007, on 04/12/2008, -1/+3That is EXACTLY what doObz said. Dude, read the article you yourself posted:
- Smeed, on 04/12/2008, -0/+13If you've ever done tech support you know most of the problems are created by the user. Im sure if millions of people were hammering on linux they would find a way to ***** that one up to. Im not defending vista in any way... being almost impervious to viruses in *nix is great but you cant underestimate a few million idiots.
- Zaneris, on 04/12/2008, -26/+13I see Linux becoming more popular as well now amongst home users with the current rate of development, not to mention that the eye-candy that will win them over is starting to really look great. http://digg.com/linux_unix/Awesome_3D_Linux_Deskto ...
- NateDog, on 04/12/2008, -17/+47Several years ago I remember agreeing with so many articles being written making fun of M's defense against their monopolistic charges. M has been saying new technologies including the open source and the web could challenge their dominance and for a long time I always thought it was bogus. But now it really seems like the writing is on the wall. For individuals there are a lot of non-microsoft options and it's only a matter of time before more and more businesses that are completely dependant on Microsoft will start to feel they have real options. Pretty amazing to think the giant may one day (in the not too distant future) fall.
- gwinerreniwg, on 04/12/2008, -7/+18Iroinically enough, MS had it right, but the DOJ forced them to decouple the browser from the OS. Had they not done this (or at least been distracted by this), MS might have become a true net-OS faster.
- WoollyMittens, on 04/12/2008, -2/+18It took all of their many many thousands of developers all those years to remove an icon from the desktop?
- Stonekeeper, on 04/12/2008, -2/+4Thank Goodness!
- astrosmash, on 04/12/2008, -1/+8First, IE was never "decoupled" from Windows. Since IE4, it has always been available as a system component to 3rd party Windows applications, in the same way that WebKit is available to OS X applications.
MS embedded IE into Windows Explorer, but they stopped doing that not because of the DOJ but because it's bad UI. Active Desktop is still available, however.
MS got in trouble for a lot of illegal and dirty tricks, one of which was the bundling of unrelated Windows system components with the IE4 installer, which forced people to install IE4 who otherwise didn't want or need it. This made most Windows applications require that IE4 be installed, not because they use IE but because they depend on an unrelated system component that was only available via the IE4 installer.
- lamiaconfitor, on 04/12/2008, -2/+1... oh no, what about my MOUS cert? /sarcasm
- Snappysnap, on 04/12/2008, -1/+4"Pretty amazing to think the giant may one day (in the not too distant future) fall."
In a sense, yes, but *everything* is cyclical and it is inevitable that MS will be brought down to size just as it was inevitable that IBM was and, if they get big enough, Apple too.- Gordraf, on 04/12/2008, -1/+1Apple *were* brought down to size, and they learned a very tough lesson through the 90s. This needs to happen with Microsoft. They need to gain a new perspective.
- FutureGuy, on 04/12/2008, -2/+9Come on, how can anyone fall for those "analyst" Gartner just got paid by Yahoo to tell the work why it is so critical to MS so they can get more dough. With an over 90% market share that is hardly changing I don't see a collapse.
- mdude85, on 04/12/2008, -4/+4Are things really changing, when one giant (Google or Apple) replaces another (Microsoft) ? Are there actually options, or just perceived options?
- Phisolo, on 04/12/2008, -2/+5If you are choosing a new giant because they offer a better widget, instead of because of product lock in, then yes there are options.
- knute5, on 04/12/2008, -1/+1Used to be Henry Ford dictated we all drove black Model T's, then the market balanced out. Nobody wants another "giant" but rather a broader playing field. We used to think Detroit made fine cars until something better came from overseas. Imagine us all still driving those rusty old land yachts...
- pdbailey, on 04/12/2008, -0/+1This is how competition works for giants. You get huge productive advantage from your size and you have a range in which your size protects you from competitors, but once you fall outside the range, another giant will take over. These firms need to leverage large size to get productive efficiency, so they are similar to governments in that way -- with little market forces on efficiency. But in this case (if this market works MS doesn't improve, and MS is as bad as some of its users claim) MS will fail in the OS department for at least a while.
- mirunit, on 04/12/2008, -5/+5Hoe exactly would you replace all the lost software? From games to email? The browser is great, but reallt fairly primitive compared to what can be done with an OS operation. Google docs is okay for recording some text information, but when I need to do graphs / formulas I will still use Excel, for writeups/reviews etc I will still use word. If we are talking about a company with an odd business model, why don't we look at google who only has 1 source of revenue?
- pdbailey, on 04/12/2008, -0/+4I can understand Excel, (one of the best applications I've ever seen), but Word? I spend huge amounts of time battling with it on formatting, I think I spend less time battling with LaTeX, and it looks far nicer (nicer font spacing, hyphenation, easier to change formats, file sizes that are a fraction of the size of word docs, easier to read).
- rowjimmy, on 04/12/2008, -0/+1"From games to email?" - games is a bit of a different story, but for email you've got thunderbird or evolution (and i'm sure there is some osx based email client)
os operations? well that's why there are other os's - with better UIs and better "behind-the-scenes" guts
"but when I need to do graphs / formulas I will still use Excel, for writeups/reviews etc I will still use word" - openoffice
i wouldn't claim that google would replace microsoft - google certainly will have a solid grip on the cloud-app market, but i think FOSS OS's (all the *nixs, for example) and the HUGE community of FOSS programmers working on projects have already far surpassed microsoft's crappy model. google "the cathedral and the bazaar" and read that article
- gwinerreniwg, on 04/12/2008, -7/+18Iroinically enough, MS had it right, but the DOJ forced them to decouple the browser from the OS. Had they not done this (or at least been distracted by this), MS might have become a true net-OS faster.
- pentupentropy, on 04/12/2008, -84/+11I WANT TO DIGG THIS TWICE!@!!!!! I've always hated MS. I should write an article on how to switch from one to another. Steve Jobs I don't like much either, but at least he worked on something other than being a salesman and a pirate. Long live Doctor Torvalds.
- Akaji, on 04/12/2008, -14/+50Spoken like a true Linux junkie - shrill and annoying.
- B1663r, on 04/12/2008, -9/+14And delusional...
- Dhekke, on 04/12/2008, -2/+5And worshipping a man who took credit for something that only happened because he is lazy
- JusticeFriend, on 04/12/2008, -1/+2"Linux junkie" hahaha
That description make my day...
- netdroid9, on 04/12/2008, -1/+22I think you're confused, Steve Jobs is a salesman, not an engineer. Apple has some great products, but they were the brainchild of Woz and other Apple engineers, not Steve. At least Bill Gates knew what he was selling.
- chris1012, on 04/12/2008, -2/+7do me a favor, go buy a hand gun, some bullets, load the bullets into the hand gun, point the barrel towards your forehead, and then pull the trigger.
Thanks.- haiduz, on 04/12/2008, -1/+3you forgot to say sudo
- gzusfreak, on 04/12/2008, -1/+8Linux users like you sometimes make me ashamed to say that I use Linux on a regular basis
- sfcaptainrob, on 04/12/2008, -1/+2I'll second that.
- sudowrestler, on 04/12/2008, -0/+1That's a lot of pent up entropy you've got there. Deep breaths. Relax.
- Akaji, on 04/12/2008, -14/+50Spoken like a true Linux junkie - shrill and annoying.
- SirPopper, on 04/12/2008, -28/+5This deal is the only chance for Microsoft to come nearer to Google, and help to prevent the monopolistic position of Google.
There was a time where Yahoo! was the top search engine and also other features which has yahoo made to the top company it is/ was.
In my opinion has Yahoo big problems and needs help, therefore it looks for help by Google.
We all must think about the fact that Google could be or is the big brother who canb control us
I only want to direct to this dugg
http://digg.com/tech_news/What_Does_Google_Know_Ab ...
There are a lot of articles around about this open your eyes. All of them warns about the monopolistic position of Google.
Google Roxx I am impressed of the features and the help I can get from the online tools delivered by Google.
I haven't hate Microsoft, but I ever tried to avoid using Microsoft products [IE vs. Firefox], also I decided not to use Yahoo search [Yahoo! vs. Google] because they were and are the best.
Now I think how can I help Microsoft and Yahoo, but their features are not so good developed and they are little bit too late.
Google has the experience and knows what we need to use the internet powerful.- Slade605, on 04/12/2008, -0/+7What the hell are you trying to say?
- ichbeineinrcg, on 04/12/2008, -0/+1I believe that he just deployed all his zigs for great justice.
- Slade605, on 04/12/2008, -0/+7What the hell are you trying to say?
- Philluminati, on 04/12/2008, -17/+54I think if they don't put out one solid operating system before 2015 that gets good reviews then they will almost certainly lose their market share. I personally don't think Windows XP cannot hold them past 2011 in my eyes. By then it will have serious failings against Linux and Mac. (one of them being the need to install 10 years of updates onto a single machine).
Let's just pretend that Vista is a total failure for a second... they still have a ~ 90% market share. I don't think that'll move excessively before 2011. By then they'll need a newer, better operating system that can compete on technical merits with Linux and Mac. It's a ticking clock however and although it sounds like a long time, it took 5 years to make Vista. With the wine project chasing away at their heels they need to do "the job properly" and do it by 2011. Hell even 2015. They have to get it *right* though.- grumpyrain, on 04/12/2008, -8/+22Monthly updates are all rolled into service packs. When XPSP3 ships, you wont have to hit windowsupdate for 10 years of updates to XP. My personal view on Vista is that it is not the problem some bloggers like to make it out to be. I waited to make that conclusion until I actually had it installed. By 2011, a machine with the pricetag of the eepc could comfortably run Vista. Today, a $500 desktop has no trouble, next year a $500 laptop will have no issue.
Where Microsoft really stuffed up was the Vista capable saga. Had they just said the minimum requirement was 1GB RAM, no mainstream tech site would have seen significant problems.
In the enterprise, Linux has a real chance, although I know of no enterprise who would commit to rolling out any OSX based platform for as long as it ties them to a single hardware vendor. It makes no difference to a home user, but businesses can't be at the whim of any one hardware vendor. They hate being at the whim of a single OS vendor too, but many sacrifice this for the convenience of software choice.- Optimaximal, on 04/12/2008, -4/+5Too true... Despite their bold claims that OS X is ready for enterprise use outside of graphics, they've yet to prove it.
The fact that Safari 3.1, their so called 'Miracle Web Browser', is currently several shades of broken on OSX with regards to sending HTTPS requests through a proxy server (which mosy credible businesses WILL be doing) says it all really.- Nanite, on 04/12/2008, -0/+7What does apple have to do to "prove" that it's good enough for business desktops? That's the last place they really want to be. The 90% ownership of the business market is all well and good, but it isn't doing Dell to good right now. The business market is all about who can sell the cheapest stripped-down box with the cheapest OS they can get away with (Linux may be free, but it isn't used on enterprise desktops.) It's a commodity market, and Apple knows better than to spend a bunch of money in a lowest-common-denominator market. They make money where they know they can, professionals and home users who are willing to pay a little more in order to receive a better computing experience. The Pointy Headed Boss doesn't care about that, he wants it cheap and ubiquitous.
- jakem1, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2There may not be huge profits in selling a single business PC but Dell and HP aren't doing too badly when they're selling millions of them. Also, the key point here is that the majority of consumers will choose Windows when they buy a computer because they are familiar with it having used it at work.
I know that Apple fans say that Apple isn't interested in the corporate market (and maybe they're right) but I don't think Apple will ever have mass adoption until they crack that market.
- jakem1, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2There may not be huge profits in selling a single business PC but Dell and HP aren't doing too badly when they're selling millions of them. Also, the key point here is that the majority of consumers will choose Windows when they buy a computer because they are familiar with it having used it at work.
- Nanite, on 04/12/2008, -0/+7What does apple have to do to "prove" that it's good enough for business desktops? That's the last place they really want to be. The 90% ownership of the business market is all well and good, but it isn't doing Dell to good right now. The business market is all about who can sell the cheapest stripped-down box with the cheapest OS they can get away with (Linux may be free, but it isn't used on enterprise desktops.) It's a commodity market, and Apple knows better than to spend a bunch of money in a lowest-common-denominator market. They make money where they know they can, professionals and home users who are willing to pay a little more in order to receive a better computing experience. The Pointy Headed Boss doesn't care about that, he wants it cheap and ubiquitous.
- Optimaximal, on 04/12/2008, -4/+5Too true... Despite their bold claims that OS X is ready for enterprise use outside of graphics, they've yet to prove it.
- xlar54, on 04/12/2008, -15/+45I really dont mean to sound harsh against Linux, but Linux is always playing catch up to other systems. Mimic and eye candy. And if Linux doesnt clean up its own act, will never be able to dominate anything. For almost a thousand years (so it seems), Linux has been getting "better" for the average desktop user. But it never actually gets there. Seriously. Linux folks need to stop singing the praises of their OS and start taking a hard look at the problems which inhibit it's acceptance as a real alternative. And you cant point fingers and blame software manufacturers or hardware manufacturers. The OS has serious problems of its own. The good news is that right now is the exact time that folks should be working on taking care of these problems. But, they wont. Linux will continue to flounder in its own mess, and I predict that ultimately, it will be Apple who dominates.
- thecheatah, on 04/12/2008, -10/+6"Linux is always playing catch up to other systems" I hope you dont mean against windows gui and mac os gui.
- DLuckyE, on 04/12/2008, -4/+10Yea, because all what matters for an OS is how cool it's gui looks....
- therightclique, on 04/12/2008, -3/+14in any event, Linux is way behind regarding GUI anyway, so the argument is pointless.
- KMartSheriff, on 04/12/2008, -5/+8Linux looks like donkey balls, what are you talking about?
- Optimaximal, on 04/12/2008, -4/+6'Yea, because all what matters for an OS is how cool it's gui looks....'
Works for Apple's Marketing/PR department... - sjmulder, on 04/12/2008, -3/+8@Optimaximal: there's a difference between looks and works of a UI. Most of OS X has a pretty well thought out interface. How it looks is just 1 part of that. That's the part the Linux people seem to fail to grasp.
- xlar54, on 04/12/2008, -4/+19GUI is an important part of it. More appropriately, user interface. And yes, Linux continues to play catch up in that arena as well. The problem with Linux is that the OS is really separate from the user interface in a very odd way. When people think Linux, they think KDE or Gnome, which as we know is not the case. But when someone thinks Mac or Windows, there's hardly any separation of the UI from the inner workings of the OS. Microsoft took a long time to introduce "themes", the ability to change your desktop, and they still are slow to adopt it....for very good reason. The average guy doesnt care, and it causes more confusion when things arent going well. Microsoft adopts a lowest common denominator policy that has worked well for them. If you have used Windows 95, odds are VERY good that you can use XP. It looks and feels pretty much the same. As an ordinary user, you feel right at home. As Windows user trying to go to Linux, the average person is going to become frustrated with the variations in user interface, from one application to another. Cut&Paste works here, but not here. Why do my files for this app save over there, and this app saves them someplace else that I cant even find? Filesystems in Linux are a nightmare as well, and even though they arent technically a UI element, they DO become visible when the Open/Save dialogs come up. Windows has My Documents. Nuff said. Linux? Who the heck knows where something will end up. These are simple examples, but they are very relevant. And they are core problems that Linux needs to address if they ever have a dream of really competing on the desktop.
- smacksaw, on 04/12/2008, -2/+9I don't think you've used Linux very much. When I save something I get my /home folder and I see my Desktop there, I also see Music, Pictures, Public, etc.
It's remarkably similar to...Windows.
And you don't have to see any other parts of the filesystem unless you turn it on. When you add software, it happens automatically from your package manager. In Windows I have to go through dialogs AND choose the folder where I want it to go. In Linux, it simply happens. I don't even need to search websites, pay for it, etc.
I think you're one of those people who used Linux for a few hours a couple of years ago...but you could not be more wrong about the whole "waiting for Linux to arrive" thing. It's here and it's fine. Everyone I have given Kubuntu or Ubuntu to has figured it out quite easily. - earthforce1, on 04/12/2008, -1/+6Xlar54:
I am writing this from a Linux desktop system, (my primary desktop) and FYI, the eye candy of compiz-fusion blows Vista out of the water on much lighter hardware, since it doesn't have to deal with stuff like protected video paths. Everybody gets the ultimate edition for free! It is actually easier to install out of the box, as it recognizes all of my new and legacy hardware without any driver disks and everything just works without 20 digit activation codes for software. And not being rooted and joined to the windows botnets is an additional plus.
I have 5 computers in the house running Debian or Ubuntu, and my 65 year old dad also runs Linux on his laptop. He manages just fine with it. - xlar54, on 04/12/2008, -1/+7I don't think you're really being honest about the whole Linux "experience".... Why do you "give" Linux to anyone? It's free to download and install themselves. It's easy right? BTW, you've got me wrong. I run Linux. Now. Works just fine in the server room. It wont be going onto our 400 desktops on the floor anytime soon though.
- SuicideMouse, on 04/12/2008, -3/+4Maybe he "gave" it to let say his mom because she (Most likely he too) got sick of fixing her WinXP installation and wanted something that "just works". That's ubuntu right there for you, it works. Also at least for right now, no one has to worry about getting a virus.
- smacksaw, on 04/12/2008, -2/+9I don't think you've used Linux very much. When I save something I get my /home folder and I see my Desktop there, I also see Music, Pictures, Public, etc.
- Optimaximal, on 04/12/2008, -0/+5But that problem is all down to training and just sitting a user down and getting them too play. After all, anyone moving to Vista from 2000/XP/2003 will be damn confused by the changes made to the 'Documents & Settings' system...
- DLuckyE, on 04/12/2008, -4/+10Yea, because all what matters for an OS is how cool it's gui looks....
- init100, on 04/12/2008, -4/+18"And you cant point fingers and blame software manufacturers or hardware manufacturers. The OS has serious problems of its own."
Why don't you make a list of the "serious problems" that you claim that Linux has? It would be much more useful than your simple claim.- xlar54, on 04/12/2008, -6/+12A better idea is for Linux developers to spend some time in the IRC chat rooms. Watch how many people constantly come and go asking "how do I do xyz?" or "Ive been fighting with this for 4 days now, and its still not working..." These are the kinds of issues I am talking about. An operating system should NOT be that complicated that it leaves people scratching their heads. I have no desire to list my own personal complaints... if they want Linux to succeed, THEY need to do the research. Its out there, and not that hard to find.
- carpespasm, on 04/12/2008, -0/+5I think the argument most linux people would make to that point xlar54 is that most of the time a user's problems are more to do with hardware compatibility. If a machine comes from a manufacturer it's hardware issues will be handled before it ships rather than having that tossed into users laps. The same could be said for people complaining about lack of drivers for a piece of hardware that wasn't designed for xpsp2 or vista.
- ForestRangerBen, on 04/12/2008, -0/+4Its piss poor documentation, for example there was no docs saying that you couldn't run VMWare Server in CentOS under the 2.16.48-53.14rel5xen kernel, it finally took a nuking of the OS to get the stupid thing working. A simple doc stating that the Xen kernel will cause other virtualization products to fail would have been nice
- Ghengis, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2ForestRangerBen: In the spirit of the open source community, why don't you write and submit that document so others can benefit from it? In my opinion, if you feel strongly about that issue, you'll fix it. If you don't feel strongly enough to fix it, stop bitching about it, because it obviously doesn't matter THAT much to you.
- TypeEE, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1Some claimed that linux has great graphics and my personal opinion with beryl or compiz fuzion is it's so hard to setup GLX on linux. I swear I got it working twice but broken after an ubuntu recommended kernel update. Now I am giving up.
Another thing that I hate about linux/unix is CDROM being unmountable if the resource is in use. On windows or Mac, I can simply press the eject button and it'll let go of my CD. On linux, I have to find out what is holding up the resource and exit that appicaltion (or log out another user) in order to eject the cd.
- Speed, on 04/12/2008, -3/+14"Linux has been getting "better" for the average desktop user. But it never actually gets there"
It's like a 1/x graph. Gets closer to 0, but never actually touches.
Yes I'm a nerd.- schoate09, on 04/12/2008, -0/+9You mean an asymptote?
- IEatHamburgers, on 04/12/2008, -0/+3Two - one vertical and one horizontal.
- schoate09, on 04/12/2008, -0/+9You mean an asymptote?
- DeathfireD, on 04/12/2008, -2/+12You have to remember Linux wasn't all about flashy GUIs and user interfaces until this past 4 or 5 years. The programmers where all about security, stability, and compatibility, something MS should have been focusing more on from the start. What you're seeing right now, this "catch up" is really the GUI programmers taking the things people like in all OSes and slowly combining them together. So in all honesty I think Linux has the right idea, it may not "be ready" for stupid people yet but at some point in the near future it will be. Oh and most of the complaints you see in IRC are either related to or directly about hardware incompatibility's in the kernel. Don't blame the programmers, blame the hardware manufactures for not publishing their specs.
- xlar54, on 04/12/2008, -6/+11But thats just it.. you can't blame the manufacturers. You can try, sure. But it's not the manufacturer's fault that the gimp looks and behaves like crap. But it's there... included on distributions. One might argue that software is not the OS, but don't people equate the behavior of Windows apps with Windows itself? Sure they do. If you're going to include software, then by perception, it becomes part of the OS to the average user. And really, it's not "stupid" people. It's just people. Folks dont want to have to have a degree in Computer Science to be able use their computer.
- thedragon4453, on 04/12/2008, -0/+6Two notes on your comment:
1. GIMP is getting a layout improvement (eventually?)
2. I think you sort of touch on something that I think that Linux, and FOSS have a problem with. Designing software for those that aren't hardcore users. I use Ubuntu, and for the most part, I find it easier than Windows. My complaint would be with the software, like GIMP, that is included. Its very functional, but it isn't designed as well. I think that we really need a big company to get on board with Linux (looking at you, Adobe!) and then Linux becomes a very viable option. - jakem1, on 04/12/2008, -2/+2People aren't stupid because they don't want to waste a whole lot of time learning a new set of archane commands just to get an operating system working. I need a pretty good reason to scrap all my Windows knowledge just to run a different OS.
- DeathfireD, on 04/13/2008, -0/+2so your saying Vista was the answer? If you haven't noticed Vista is like a completely different OS. Jumping from XP to Vista is like jumping from XP to linux. So in all honestly I think it would take about the same amount of time or less time to learn how to use Linux as it would to learn how to use Vista.
- kahrn, on 04/12/2008, -2/+4Firstly, Linux is a kernel. Secondly, How things are arranged (regarding usability) is down to the desktop environment or the distribution. The GUI in *nix is not playing catch up with anyone else -- if anything it's the other way round. KDE, Xfce, Fluxbox, Gnome, Conky, Compiz, etc.. all great projects in the field of GUI. Then of course there are all the other projects that are great to Linux, regarding Security, usability, performance, etc..
I think you're slightly ill informed on how it all comes together. It's not the fault of Linux developers if it's to hard to use for idiots. It's not the fault of the Linux developers if things are different and you can't handle difference. Nobody asked you to use it, so either shut up and don't or do and contribute.
As it stands, it's an operating system for those that can handle choice and difference and want to have a close experience with the operating system. Solving problems is fun, using Linux is fun. That's why it's mainly for those of us who are in the field of computer science and ENJOY using it and it's bleeding edge features and having the choice to do what WE want to do and not someone else (i.e. the vendor)
If you want a linux system that's easy to use and not designed for people within the field of computer science - Ubuntu, PCLinuxOS (perhaps -- never tried it), and LinuxMint are what you want. I think they're almost ready for average joe.- xlar54, on 04/13/2008, -3/+1"It's not the fault of Linux developers if it's to hard to use for idiots. "
As Yoda once said... "and that is why you fail." Idiots make up most of the world. Really. Cater to them, or get left behind. "Idiots" ARE the people buying computers. People dont want to join some kind of exclusive club...they want to write emails, surf the net...ebay... music...etc.- nmnnotmyname, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1Well, Linux is not Free Windows, and this is why you fail.
Think hard: Why can't people use Linux? It's not all that hard, It's a lot to learn. Why is it a lot to learn? Because it's not windows, so you have to start from scratch. You don't know anything about your computer anymore the first time you switch from Windows to Linux.
- nmnnotmyname, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1Well, Linux is not Free Windows, and this is why you fail.
- xlar54, on 04/13/2008, -3/+1"It's not the fault of Linux developers if it's to hard to use for idiots. "
- SuicideMouse, on 04/12/2008, -2/+6Warning: This will be a long comment.
I don't want to sound harsh against you because I'm not being a fanboy right now but I disagree with you strongly. As for "catching up" the GUI part of my argument I think was handled by DeathfireD well enough and the only other thing that I could see calling "catching up" is the wine project, which is only for people who really, really want some of the software written for Windows, it makes sense that isn't "ahead" of Windows.
I know this is a bold statement but I'm willing to argue this point, I believe Linux IS better for the average desktop user then WinXP. I'm the oldest sibling of three in my family and I watched my youngest siblings switch to ubuntu from WinXP/Vista, each with their own reason. Now fair enough, I have hounded on XP in front of my family but I never forced this changed and it fills me with joy to tell this story.
I was in my room listening to music when my brother, 14 at the time, came in looking all serious, "I need your help, my computer's broken again". I proceeded to ask him what was wrong and he told me about how XP was being "weird" and that he scanned his computer and found a few virus/malware programs so I told him (As usual) "I'll take a look at it when I have some time" but then he said quickly "No, I was wondering if I could borrow a live disk of ubuntu". I was shocked, not only had he apparently been paying attention during one of my rants, he had remembered the proper names of things. I asked him if I heard him correctly and that he wanted me to install ubuntu on his pc but again he responded with an answer I did not expect, "No, I want to do it myself, I want it to be mine." I jumped at the opportunity and quickly tossed him a DVD and told him I would help him if he needed it. He had a working pc in less then an hour and only asked for my help when trying to figure out what software he should use to get Counter-strike working, I only needed to tell him "wine". I was totally amazed by his switch, he did it all by himself! It was a proud moment for me and even though it took him a while to get Apt and a few other things, he did and he was proud of himself. He's also mentioned how useful google is for finding fixes to problems.
About two months later my 11 year old sister basically pulled the same thing, complaining about WinXP on the old laptop she uses (Doesn't get to keep it in her room, a relief for an older brother). She asked if she could use linux like her brothers and I tried explaining that it wouldn't be easy for her but you know how little girls can be. So soon we had another ubuntu system in the house and while yes, I handle the installation of software, not updates (she gets that), I did that anyways when XP was on it. She loves how it works faster for everything she wanted like IMing and browsing the internet, as well as how it "looks better", it's pink.
My family isn't some crazy intelligent nerd squad or something, neither my brother or my sister spend more then an hour (Even half unless there are games involved) on their computer a day, but they all quickly got the hang of linux and are more then happy. To me, the average user is my 11 and 14 year old siblings and they love ubuntu.
So argue with me if you will but I've said nothing other then facts here so I don't know what you will argue about. - techresearcher, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2I agreed with every part of your comment except the last sentence.
- thecheatah, on 04/12/2008, -10/+6"Linux is always playing catch up to other systems" I hope you dont mean against windows gui and mac os gui.
- aelias, on 04/12/2008, -6/+18Vista doesn't bother me in the slightest. I have Ultimate SP1, and I can't use basic to run Pro-Tools, which is stupid, but other than that fraction of a fraction of the market that runs into those issues, any OS is going to have it's specialized software that you have to go download to make your life tolerable, so who cares? Linux is free, but still not idiot proof, Mac OS has the high point of entry to the common consumer that can't get it to install on something else. By the time any of it matters, we'll be controlling our computer by waving our hands around and talking into our 40 inch super-wide screen wraparound monitors.
- carpespasm, on 04/12/2008, -1/+4great. from carpel tunnel to tennis elbow....
- Aensland, on 04/12/2008, -4/+12Right, let's ignore the multibillion dollar gaming industry, and how even graphics hardware manufacturers make their boards DirectX compatible. :S MS may lose some marketshare, but to totally disappear, not likely. Plus, read what xlar54 said above, minus the last part about Apple dominating (hint, it's not, Apple isn't even a consideration in the rest of the world when you talk about endusers and price/performance/availability). Apple may have a large presence for americans, but out here in southeast asia there's like 1 Apple shop in each tech mall, whereas every other shop is a PC shop.
- Nanite, on 04/12/2008, -2/+6I don't think you realize how possible it is for developers to change their tools. It doesn't happen over night, but with cross compilers and other tricks, you can use a lot of the same code when moving to a completely new system. Despite what people think, openGL is still a very viable option, and can be exchanged for DirectX. And all graphics accelerators support it. So you can't say MS has a death-grip on the games industry, the second developers see that people are jumping ship to another OS, they will go too.
- thailand1972, on 04/12/2008, -4/+11Can someone explain to me how Linux or OSX is better for your average user than XP/Vista. I mean for your average user (which makes up 99% of the market) not some network admin who is a command line enthusiast. Seriously, there's PLENTY of Windows bashing going on these days, but can someone concisely and compellingly tell me why Joe Average needs Linux / OSX as opposed to Windows? And don't give me the hardware reason - XP runs fine on low spec machines.
- Angostura, on 04/12/2008, -4/+10I use Windows XP at work and OS X at home, my 80+ year old parents also use OS X. You're right. Windows works just fine in most cases. But I wouldn't call it a particular joy to use. Why did I go for OS X?
1. The bundled iLife apps are very very good, and since I wanted to do some movie editing and DVD burning that saved me some cash.
2. Effectively virus free at the moment. No, I'm not claiming that it will always be so, but yes I think OS X's approach to security is stronger than XP and less annoying than Vista.
3. It runs Office just fine
4. I can geek about with the Unix underpinnings if I want.
It is too much to say that it "just works" there are problems, but I would say in general it is more likely to 'just work' than Windows and that's important when remotely supporting parents.
So in summary more pleasant to use, currently fewer security woes, very nice bundled apps, really nice 3rd part app support (no, I'm not kidding, games are thin on the ground, but there are some nice software houses out there), command-line fun it you want it.- thailand1972, on 04/12/2008, -6/+6I don't get viruses on XP - seriously. I just don't. Maybe it's me, but my Nod32 never tells me I have a virus, and I trust Nod32 because it does tell me when the servers I run get viruses, and they're quarantined anyway so I don't have to worry about them. Anyway, I feel that viruses are a bit of a moot point as I don't honestly see that as a problem your average user encounters. You've given me your reasons why you like OS X at home, but your average user who wants to do movie editing / DVD burning isn't going to be stuck for choices on a Windows platform. If they want to save cash, anyone semi-determined can find what they need online.
Windows runs Office just fine too - why switch?
You can "geek about" with Unix underpinnings - good for you. It's not a point most people care about themselves.
So I'm not convinced by your argument. Seriously, I'm not trying to disagree for the sake of it. Just I don't see anything compelling to make the switch and invest in the learning curve and costs just to do what I can do on Windows. - phoomp, on 04/12/2008, -2/+3I use both a Mac and Windows at home. I *don't* find the Mac particularly more "joyful" to use than Windows.
I just use each to their strengths; Mac to do basic video editing (yes, iMovie and iDVD are nice), the Windows to get those videos into a wider range of compatible formats and also for storing my photos (iPhoto is *not* nice and there are more photo management options for Windows). The Mac is my primary surfer, but I'm using FireFox, not Safari. Windows is my primary downloader and gamer.
- thailand1972, on 04/12/2008, -6/+6I don't get viruses on XP - seriously. I just don't. Maybe it's me, but my Nod32 never tells me I have a virus, and I trust Nod32 because it does tell me when the servers I run get viruses, and they're quarantined anyway so I don't have to worry about them. Anyway, I feel that viruses are a bit of a moot point as I don't honestly see that as a problem your average user encounters. You've given me your reasons why you like OS X at home, but your average user who wants to do movie editing / DVD burning isn't going to be stuck for choices on a Windows platform. If they want to save cash, anyone semi-determined can find what they need online.
- smacksaw, on 04/12/2008, -7/+5Your average user doesn't want to pay $30 to archive files, deal with spyware, viruses, etc.
If you can provide them with the same experience, but not nickel-and-dime them, you are on to something. When you buy Windows you are getting an incomplete product. Partly because of gov't regulation keeping MS from offering everything and partly to keep bloat down. Linux is the same thing. It's incomplete. But as you round it out with the tools you need for daily operation that 99% needs, do you:
A. Find yourself on a website or at a store purchasing a program
B. Find yourself at your package manager adding it for free in an automated process that requires 0 input from you
The people driving Linux development are pros. As such, they don't understand what the novice wants or needs. When they make a product for that 99%, you'll know why people need Linux. They don't care enough about computers to buy subscriptions for anti-virus software or to pay to install the newest version of some utility. - DeathfireD, on 04/12/2008, -5/+5well considering most people use the computer just for e-mail, read news, and watch videos, Linux covers that and can be installed on basically any ***** box you have laying around and still be able to run major programs. The OS offers the same tools with similar if not the same GUI so any idiot could figure out how to send mail and browse the web. Got a parent or grandparent that's using win98 right now and it's infested with viruses and Trojans? Do they call you asking for help on their computer? Ya I think we all do. Install Linux on it, introduce them to firefox and thunderbird (better yet gmail) and there ya go. Never have to worry about bad stuff again. Linux may not be the cure for everything but it's certainly ready for the "basic user" like your parents or grandparents.
- thailand1972, on 04/12/2008, -6/+4So basically Linux doesn't offer anything new. That's my point. It's another alternative that does the same stuff for 99% of the public who already are used to Windows, have it installed, and see no need to change. Comparing Win 98 to Linux is a little unfair; it's like comparing a 1998 build of Linux to XP/Vista.
- earthforce1, on 04/12/2008, -1/+6I see major improvements in all software when I upgrade to the next Ubuntu release every six months or so. Firefox 3 is a lot lighter and faster. Compiz fusion is stable, and runs well on my NV-6800 video card, and having used Vista ultimate I can say this is much better. I wish I could get the spinning workspace cube on my windows desktop at work, it is not just eye candy, it is very useful to flip between desktops with a flick of the mouse.
- thailand1972, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1@earthforce, I run XP and don't get any performance issues on a low-spec laptop (512Mb RAM, 1.7Ghz CPU). I haven't tried FF3 yet, but from all accounts it will be a lot quicker on my XP than FF2 is. So we're all benefiting from FF developers improving FF, not just Linux users.
The benefits you mention seem very minor, if not outright non-issues to your average user. - DeathfireD, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1Did I say it didn't offer anything new? No I didn't, don't assume things.
- earthforce1, on 04/12/2008, -1/+6I see major improvements in all software when I upgrade to the next Ubuntu release every six months or so. Firefox 3 is a lot lighter and faster. Compiz fusion is stable, and runs well on my NV-6800 video card, and having used Vista ultimate I can say this is much better. I wish I could get the spinning workspace cube on my windows desktop at work, it is not just eye candy, it is very useful to flip between desktops with a flick of the mouse.
- thailand1972, on 04/12/2008, -6/+4So basically Linux doesn't offer anything new. That's my point. It's another alternative that does the same stuff for 99% of the public who already are used to Windows, have it installed, and see no need to change. Comparing Win 98 to Linux is a little unfair; it's like comparing a 1998 build of Linux to XP/Vista.
- earthforce1, on 04/12/2008, -8/+7Let's see the costs of running Vista:
About $350 or so for Vista Ultimate - That would buy you a decent motherboard and CPU
Anti-virus software subscription - about $50 per year, would pay for your RAM
Office 2007 - about $500 or so? - Buys a nice monitor
The equivalent of all these are free with any recent linux distro. The savings on software alone will buy you a new PC - the lighter hardware requirements means you probably won't have to. (Less e-waste in the landfill for all of you environmentalists out there) The kids each have a very usable PC with full OpenOffice software, Firefox and GIMP and a selection of games running well on "obsolete" PCs our IT department were scrapping. How much do you think it would cost as minimum hardware and software wise to build a new Vista capable PC with MS-Office suite for each kid?- thailand1972, on 04/12/2008, -5/+4You're exaggerating the point about cost. In a real-life scenario, Joe Average buys a PC/laptop for $600-700 including all the software you mention, apart from Vista Ultimate which your average user doesn't need anyway. A lot of people have a pirated edition of XP (again, real-life scenario) so to all intents and purposes XP is free. Vista Ultimate is 100baht in Thailand ;). Again, I've yet to hear a compelling reason why Joe Average doesn't choose the $600 package in the high street loaded with the software he needs over a Linux distro that doesn't support his printer and other hardware, doesn't play games, but in real-life might save him $50-75.
- adolfojp, on 04/12/2008, -4/+4Let's see the costs of running Vista:
Vista Home Premium OEM: $100
AVG free anti virus: $0
Open Office, Firefox and Gimp for Windows: $0
Cost of a Vista Machine over an equivalent Linux Machine: $100
I use both Windows and Linux at home and at work. Both systems have their own strengths and weaknesses. But to say that you should get a Linux machine because you can't run free open source software in Vista is quite hilarious. - SearchX, on 04/12/2008, -3/+4earthforce1:
Vista - Home Premium is commonly included on any desktop/laptop you purchase
Anti-virus - AVG Anti-virus is free
Office 2007 - Google Documents is free and you can access your files from any computer with Internet access
The average Joe does not go out and purchase their own hardware components and a decent performing system can be purchased for $300-400.- earthforce1, on 04/12/2008, -2/+4To say that it is "included' is a fallacy - your OEM is paying for it and it has been hidden in the price. I have an OEM copy of "Home Premium" edition that was bundled with a laptop I bought last year collecting dust on the shelf. Nobody, including Dell gets it for free, although they try and reduce the end user cost by adding crapware to the default install.
Yes, you can of course install OpenOffice and Firefox on windows machines, I have done so at work. But it does't come installed out of the box like it does with a lot of Linux distros, so most windows users are not even aware of it. Joe Average just tends to "activate" whatever 90 day trial AV program came preinstalled.
You can build a cheaper Vista based solution if you know what you are doing and know where to find free alternatives, but most people don't. And last time I checked, they wasn't any free DVD player (not counting trial edition SW, feel free to contradict me if I am wrong ) for windows unless was hidden in the initial price as part of an OEM deal. - ThugThrasher, on 04/12/2008, -0/+1earthforce1:
Again, we're talking about your average user. As far as they are concerned it IS included. As long as the vast majority of prebuilt machines include Windows (and yes, they do almost always 'include' DVD software), then that is all they will see. They don't SEE the price of each individual thing. All they see is a computer for $500. This computer has Windows on it, so they're not likely to want to put Linux on it unless you give them a legitimate reason. Just like they are not going to buy a different mouse unless you give them a legitimate reason they would want one. Same applies to video card, sound card, power supply, network card, etc. To the average consumer, all of these are INCLUDED in their initial purchase price and it takes a good bit of explanation and persuasion to convince them otherwise. Especially since, for most people, there really ISN'T a reason to trade out any of that if it would cost them time and/or money. - jakem1, on 04/12/2008, -1/+2Windows Media Player plays DVDs natively in Vista. Also, although it is included in the price, an OEM copy of Vista from a major manufacturer like Dell costs about $40 due to bulk discounts that Microsoft offer. That's hardly the $350 you quoted earlier. Also, your average user has IE and doesn't need Firefox out of the box.
- earthforce1, on 04/12/2008, -2/+4To say that it is "included' is a fallacy - your OEM is paying for it and it has been hidden in the price. I have an OEM copy of "Home Premium" edition that was bundled with a laptop I bought last year collecting dust on the shelf. Nobody, including Dell gets it for free, although they try and reduce the end user cost by adding crapware to the default install.
- adolfojp, on 04/12/2008, -4/+1Whoops, wrong reply button.
- Francky, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2Well I for one, after using windows since it's beginning, have switched my business to OS X. The main reason I would say is simple. No more Registries, No more DLLs, No more installing a software that screws up something else. All software on Mac OS live in there own space in a sense. They Each contain there settings and "dlls", so if you don't want it anymore, you don't really need to unninstall it, just chuck in the trashcan. that would delete all it's components, "registries" and "dlls". This way of dealing with apps and files on a mac is what makes it so much better in my view. There is no problem of "contamination" like Windows, where the more you use it, the more cluttered and unresponsive it gets. It just works better and Always feels like its freshly installed, because in a sense it always is, the OS itself never gets affected by any apps. Windows is extremely flawed when it comes to this, any apps affects the OS itself.
Some of my analogies where pretty basic, just wanted to explain simply ;) And yes, when deleting an app, by chucking it in the trash, some files, like user preference files might remain on the drive, but again, these are files only accessed by the application in question, so they would not have any effect if not deleted, except use 4K of space :p Then again, free apps like "appdelete" would fix this, just drop the app it's icon and it would find and delete Everything ;)
Hopes this helps. - stock99, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1linux = virus free. I have running it for 4 year and no antivirus installed and never got infection. Can you do that for winxp? Hopefully this answer your average Joe doubt.
Try to uninstall your virus/spyware protection on your winxp. Just witness how much faster it run.
- Angostura, on 04/12/2008, -4/+10I use Windows XP at work and OS X at home, my 80+ year old parents also use OS X. You're right. Windows works just fine in most cases. But I wouldn't call it a particular joy to use. Why did I go for OS X?
- griz, on 04/12/2008, -1/+7The main problem MS has is speed of adoption. Once people get comfortable in a version of an OS, they don't want to move. Or take a very long time to move. When adoption takes a long time, it begins to appear to the holdbacks that there are problems and they continue to hold back. Since MS has so many users, it it extremely difficult to "get that ship turned around".
The problem the linux community has is the number of distros. The average consumer doesn't care at all about the variety of options they have in linux distros. They just want a simple OS that does what they want and does it fast and securely. Hence the recent mention of Linux/Ubuntu name interchange. If the Linux community could simply settle on a single distro that could go head to head with Windows and OS X then it would make a huge difference to their acceptance by general consumers.
Apple has an advantage here. Their small market share allows them to keep their user base on the latest OS technology because of fast user adoption. Once Apple becomes the giant ship like MS is, they too will have the same trouble. If that day ever comes. For now, it is to their advantage to be smaller than their competition.
- grumpyrain, on 04/12/2008, -8/+22Monthly updates are all rolled into service packs. When XPSP3 ships, you wont have to hit windowsupdate for 10 years of updates to XP. My personal view on Vista is that it is not the problem some bloggers like to make it out to be. I waited to make that conclusion until I actually had it installed. By 2011, a machine with the pricetag of the eepc could comfortably run Vista. Today, a $500 desktop has no trouble, next year a $500 laptop will have no issue.
- profvegas, on 04/12/2008, -16/+9And the wheel turns again, once upon a time all you had were dumb terminals that plugged into mainframes, now the browser is the dumb-terminal and the Web the Mainframe. I do see where the OS becomes irrelevant as the Web breaks continues to away from classic desktop/laptop computer. A good day for Linux I'd say.
- Akaji, on 04/12/2008, -1/+10"I do see where the OS becomes irrelevant as the Web breaks continues to away from classic desktop/laptop computer. A good day for Linux I'd say."
Non-sequitur.- profvegas, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1Indeed, that should have read:
"I do see where the OS becomes increasingly irrelevant as the Web continues to break away from classic desktop/laptop computer. A good day for Linux I'd say."- Akaji, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1Again, a non-sequitur. To say that the OS is becoming increasingly irrelevant and then to say that it is a good day for Linux (an OS) is not only a non-sequitur, but it's actually stating the opposite of what is true.
- profvegas, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1Indeed, that should have read:
- bjornski, on 04/12/2008, -5/+4Why? Once the OS becomes irrelevant, nobody will give a ***** about Linux anymore than they do any other OS.
- smacksaw, on 04/12/2008, -4/+7Would you rather have your irrelevant cost $199.99 or $0.00?
- itsthebrod, on 04/12/2008, -1/+1And that's assuming the Windows price would stay at $200, which it wouldn't if it were honestly "irrelevant."
- Akaji, on 04/15/2008, -0/+1GoogleOS
- smacksaw, on 04/12/2008, -4/+7Would you rather have your irrelevant cost $199.99 or $0.00?
- adolfojp, on 04/12/2008, -0/+1Yes, web apps will make desktop apps irrelevant... in a world where latency doesn't exist and everybody has a dedicated OC-768 line at home and a dedicated powerful server on the web.
- jakem1, on 04/12/2008, -0/+1Not to mention a world without privacy concerns. Also, apps like Google Docs are just a joke compared to Word. Heck, I could do more with Word 95 than I could with Google Docs.
- Akaji, on 04/12/2008, -1/+10"I do see where the OS becomes irrelevant as the Web breaks continues to away from classic desktop/laptop computer. A good day for Linux I'd say."
- sirhomer, on 04/12/2008, -19/+39This is all predicted word for word in the Gospel of Tux. Excellent. Soon the giant penguin of Nor'dai shall walk the Earth again and the followers of Gates will cower in horror as the great bird wreaks ultimate vengence among the defenders of the Microsoft. For it is written that way, and that way it shall be. Praise be Turing!
- 4ndr3wk, on 04/12/2008, -15/+9What the *****? go outside and get some fresh air, please!!
- DeathGod321, on 04/12/2008, -0/+8So say we all.
- ZeRux, on 04/12/2008, -14/+1This comment shows perfectly why Linux needs to be banned by law. Also, promoting it should become a criminal offense - its followers are more deluded and dangerous than Scientologists!
- Metasquares, on 04/12/2008, -1/+6"And the beast reborn spread over the earth and its numbers grew legion. And they proclaimed the times and sacrificed crops unto the fire, with the cunning of foxes. And they built a new world in their own image as promised by the sacred words, and spoke of the beast with their children. Mammon awoke, and lo! it was naught but a follower."
--The Book of Mozilla - digitalpencil, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2^^You all need to learn to take a joke.
- mikemil828, on 04/12/2008, -0/+4Well this explains a lot, about linux fanboys.
- Wartz, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2WHOOOSH * 2
- Topher06, on 04/12/2008, -33/+267That is the most laughable statement. While I agree that Vista was handled poorly by Microsoft, its not the collapse of Windows, and Windows based PC will last a good long while. The most laughable thing is that while so called "analysts" are predicting the demise of Windows, the reason why Vista isn't selling well is because of Windows. People just don't see a need to upgrade to Vista when XP has turned out to be a mature, stable, and ultimately secure OS.
So, while Vista might ultimately be a flop, Microsoft will plod on with their 90% market share, and people smoking crack will all keep predicting when OS X or Linux will take over the world.- Akaji, on 04/12/2008, -6/+17So long as Microsoft isn't stupid enough to stop supporting Windows XP until a better Windows is created.
- secondwheel2, on 04/12/2008, -3/+10Even if microsoft did stop supporting XP, the OS is so good that it doesn't need updates. People will still make drivers (They still make drivers for windows 98 on new hardware).
- frazw, on 04/12/2008, -1/+4Are you serious? Are you suggesting that XP requires no more security updates? This might not be a big problem for the tech savvy but what about the countless businesses using XP with complete morons clicking on porn links?
- lamiaconfitor, on 04/12/2008, -2/+2But they won't keep supporting it. oh no.
- secondwheel2, on 04/12/2008, -3/+10Even if microsoft did stop supporting XP, the OS is so good that it doesn't need updates. People will still make drivers (They still make drivers for windows 98 on new hardware).
- domokunt, on 04/12/2008, -1/+17Businesses are well known to be very slow at moving on to the next version of Windows. I remember all the stories when XP was out that so many businesses had yet to upgrade to it.
- lamiaconfitor, on 04/12/2008, -0/+6Its never profitable. why upgrade perfectly fine computers when all the employees are used to a set up, all your files and programs are set how you like it, and you are probably running on inexpensive hardware. Companies have no use for a quad core processor, 8800 gtx sli graphics and 4-8 gigs of ram.
- KMartSheriff, on 04/12/2008, -10/+20As a Mac lover, I couldn't agree with you more. I'm happy to see more people using Macs, but to think for a second that Macs would ever take over Windows is laughable at best. Linux, despite what those basement-dwellers would like to believe, would never have a chance.
- xsquirrel378x, on 04/12/2008, -7/+9"Linux, despite what those basement-dwellers would like to believe, would never have a chance."
linux is huge for servers, businesses are cutting costs and switching to linux, PC vendors are equipping their PCs with pre-installed linux to save money, a lot of regular people in general are switching to linux. and it dramatically improves every year. literally- weebs, on 04/12/2008, -1/+7no, they're really not. not in the grand scheme of things.
- TypeEE, on 04/13/2008, -0/+3You are right that they are huge for servers but nothing else.
- lamiaconfitor, on 04/12/2008, -3/+2lets see, pay out the ass for osx/msv... or free linux distro? they all do the same thing? well obviously not the free one. which one is more expensive, it must work better.
- earthforce1, on 04/12/2008, -4/+1I think Google (they run their entire search engine on Linux) and IBM would have something to say about that.
Also, I would bet my bottom dollar your local ISP runs much of their back end on Linux; How do you think Red Hat made their fortune?
I wouldn't be surprised if you are using it and don't even know it - a lot of wireless routers like my trusty Linksys have a stripped down linux kernel. - Railz, on 04/12/2008, -3/+4I don't use Linux myself, but you do know the Military and NASA use Linux right?
- iddybiddy, on 04/12/2008, -0/+4Yep and Windows and osx
- xsquirrel378x, on 04/12/2008, -7/+9"Linux, despite what those basement-dwellers would like to believe, would never have a chance."
- carl0ski, on 04/12/2008, -9/+2The real problem here for MS and Vista is
Computers are pushing to become smaller and use less power,
The Desktop, Desktop Replacement Laptop should soon become extinct.
Look at eeePC by Asus
VIsta fails to suit Ultra portable and ultra low power devices such as PDA and Phones.
The idea Windows in general will fail in its current form revolves around the same issue.
Windows XP too is not as suitable for ultra low power devices.- estvir, on 04/12/2008, -0/+12Who in their right mind ever thought Vista was for PDAs and phones? There's a little something known as Windows Mobile, Windows Embedded, etc. By the way, Vista does run on UMPCs.
- Wartz, on 04/12/2008, -0/+1The powerful desktop wont be replaced unless some huge new breakthrough in chip technology occurs so systems can be 1/10th the size with the same or more power as today's systems. There are many many millions of people out there who like playing new video games, and powerful systems are needed to play new video games.
- balazsbela, on 04/12/2008, -15/+2Tell me you didn't just call XP secure, OMG you did.
- trispear, on 04/12/2008, -12/+2Secure? What universe are you living in and how can I get there? Yes, maybe for the average geek. But XP is not an OS I'd trust to my Personal Computer while my parents or siblings use it without screwing something up...
Not even when running anti-virus or anti-spyware or a combination of all of the above. Why? Because, I have seen machines hacked, vandalized, or just generally filled with crap even when locked down.
Yes, XP is okay but don't pretend it doesn't have security problems. I also end my reinstalling my personal copy every 6-12 months. Not because I couldn't fix up various problems but because it's not worth the time. In contrast, my OS X has lasted 3 years without reinstallation or slow-downs. I would say same goes for Ubuntu, but I tended to reinstall it completely in the early releases rather than update it, but it's at 18 months and running now.
XP Pro is nicer (files level access control) but most people had home preinstalled. And I won't even talk about all the software/drivers that wants you to run as admin/root for some unfathomable reason.- weebs, on 04/12/2008, -1/+1lol.
- lamiaconfitor, on 04/12/2008, -1/+3yeah, no one will ever want to do more then browse the web and create txt files. /sarcasm
- troopa, on 04/12/2008, -1/+3Thank you for having some sense. I appreciate it in today's world.
- JavanSClark, on 04/12/2008, -0/+6The primary reason for the lack of sales to companies is: Why on earth would they spend a TON of money to implement Vista when they have XP and it works beautifully for what they need. People aren't "arms-lengthing" Vista out of fear (for the most part) they are staying with XP because it's the correct decision as it relates to running a business.
- knute5, on 04/12/2008, -0/+3The Mac is a great OS but not suited to "take over the world." It's overkill for a lot of users. However, it's just part of the feisty Apple brand for its fans and users to want Apple to take over the world, to unseat the evil despots, etc. Won't happen, thankfully, but it does make people feel empowered, and Apple does tend to nudge other players into making more user-friendly software...
- mrmx, on 04/12/2008, -0/+3If Microsoft answers Apple in the same way that Intel answered AMD, things will be interesting! In general, I like singularity and believe it's a better concept than mach since singularity handles the performance problems of microkernals in a VERY interesting way. In fact, singularity doesn't even require context switching since, by design, all loaded code is secure. thus, if microsoft gets singularity out the door, I think the world will-- once again, worship microsoft! and I, for one, can't wait for it to happen!
- svtspeed, on 04/12/2008, -8/+2What you all fail to realize is Microsoft essentially bet everything on Vista's success - going so far as to discontinue downgrades to XP. They have already spent so much on marketing, development, support, ect. To re-nig now would be finical suicide. I am an IT systems engineer for a fortune 100 company and a couple of month's or Microsoft TAM came in and essentially offered us next to free licenses to implement Vista enterprise - the deal ultimately shot down as Vista only ran stable on about 20 of more than 150 apps in the environment. These guys are desperate...
- aclockwork3, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2but man now you're just straight dissing on the crack heads, and that aint cool. crack heads are the prize of our society.
- LloydBentsen, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2boom-shaka-laka!
- Akaji, on 04/12/2008, -6/+17So long as Microsoft isn't stupid enough to stop supporting Windows XP until a better Windows is created.
- Lazdude, on 04/12/2008, -13/+5I agree, and I think Microsoft realises this too - which would explain their planned aquisition of Yahoo.
- Aharoni, on 04/12/2008, -6/+5It has nothing to do with Vista - its all to go against Google.
- Ell3, on 04/12/2008, -21/+12"Even If Windows and Office were perfect, would it be enough to keep Microsoft relevant in the medium term?”
Great line and oh so accurate. Online apps, open source apps and pirated apps are steadily eroding their bottom line.- Aharoni, on 04/12/2008, -3/+12Regarding online apps - Which business in its right mind would use online applications for keeping and working on sensitive internal data?
Would you like for, lets say in 10 years from now, that Visa would have all the information they have on you in some "Google spreadsheet"-like service?
Online services are all fun and games, but for many and even most cases - irrelevant. I'll never trust an outside organization (no matter how "no-evil" they are) to keep my data. What about working offline on the data? I don't always have internet connection... yes, I know Google is offering a "work-offline" mode, but why won't I simply work on my document on the much more mature Office Word and simply back up my documents with a web drive?
The only place online apps may hurt the sales are the home users, who don't need much more than the little Google is offering them today... and for that Microsoft is brewing an answer.- buddypriefert, on 04/12/2008, -4/+5Good point Aharoni.
- Aensland, on 04/12/2008, -1/+3I don't know who dugg you down (edit: oh, you're at +3 now), but that's exactly true. Sure, I find myself developing more browser-based apps for in-house work, but everything is kept IN the company -- the stuff is "online" but only on the LAN. I don't see any company offshoring their private corporate information any time soon. Not to mention that it's harder to cook the books when someone else is holding them...
- estvir, on 04/12/2008, -2/+5Online apps have even less a chance of Linux.
- Ell3, on 04/12/2008, -7/+3"I'll never trust an outside organization (no matter how "no-evil" they are) to keep my data."
You won't allow outside organizations to keep your data, but you let MS read your index.dat file whenever they want? Good thinking.
- bingobongony, on 04/12/2008, -3/+10Yeah...Microsofot is just DYING in terms of profits!
Honestly...when you typed that, did even YOU think that what you were typing was going to sound intelligent? - LemmingJesus, on 04/12/2008, -0/+3Damn, so you mean that because I'm running Windows I can't run open source programs? Like GIMP, and Firefox which I am using right now. You also say online applications don't run on my browser either? You must be going to a different internet than the rest of the world.
- Aharoni, on 04/12/2008, -3/+12Regarding online apps - Which business in its right mind would use online applications for keeping and working on sensitive internal data?
- dukeeeey, on 04/12/2008, -12/+104"Windows isn’t really that relevant any more just because of the increasing utility of online applications"
why do people this cluless even write articles ? Are they just paid to write BS ?- bjornski, on 04/12/2008, -2/+9"By George, I think he's got it!"
- vaxen, on 04/12/2008, -4/+1Np s**t, man, totally agree with you. But, then, look at the MSM?! Right on. Tux sux!
- bjornski, on 04/12/2008, -2/+9"By George, I think he's got it!"
- Planets, on 04/12/2008, -12/+9How does an operating system collapse?
- BagginsBoy, on 04/12/2008, -12/+6Ever used Windows?
- thecheatah, on 04/12/2008, -8/+5BSoD
- B1663r, on 04/12/2008, -3/+4You haven't used windows lately have you? By lately, I mean the last 10 years or so...
- zoom1928, on 04/12/2008, -3/+1What do you mean by that? I still see blue screens several times a day on our systems. Admittedly our app servers are under a pretty heavy load, but Windows Server 2k3 shouldn't crash so often.
- adolfojp, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2If your Windows Servers 2k3 are crashing then you have a serious hardware or driver problem.
- estvir, on 04/12/2008, -0/+5zoom1928, you need to fire your IT staff than if they can't keep Windows Server 2003 from crashing often.. or XP, or 2000, etc.
- zoom1928, on 04/12/2008, -3/+1What do you mean by that? I still see blue screens several times a day on our systems. Admittedly our app servers are under a pretty heavy load, but Windows Server 2k3 shouldn't crash so often.
- B1663r, on 04/12/2008, -3/+4You haven't used windows lately have you? By lately, I mean the last 10 years or so...
- Shadowgamers, on 04/12/2008, -6/+3Kernel Panic, BSOD/RSOD or an indefinite hang
- Speed, on 04/12/2008, -5/+2Ever try installing an Nvidia driver in Vista? Or Linux for that matter?
- smacksaw, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2I've tried installing nVidia drivers with EnvyNG and have had nothing but automated success with it. It couldn't be easier or more reliable. I've bought two new machines in the last few months and I have Vista on one and XP on the other and then Kubuntu on both. I had problems with the nVidia driver on Windows...especially on the Vista machine. BSOD. EnvyNG was 2 for 2 on both machines working perfectly, and on this machine I've installed different flavours of Linux several times and never had EnvyNG fail me, even on the 8.xx alphas.
- Speed, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1I've never heard of EnvyNG before today, but thanks for the tip.
- gameforge, on 04/12/2008, -1/+3Yeah. In Windows, you download it, and then you double-click it. In Ubuntu, you click "yes" in the box that asks if you want to install the proprietary video driver.
Hint: that's not how operating systems collapse.- lordtyros, on 04/12/2008, -1/+3In Ubuntu, often the proprietary video driver doesn't work. In that case, you go online, google through forums until you learn of a tool called Envy. What does Envy do? It installs video drivers. Why does it have to exist? I don't know.
That's the thing I hate about Ubuntu fans. They have built up the myth of the perfectly working add/remove programs that always has everything you need. And that is complete *****.- gameforge, on 04/12/2008, -0/+1You had this problem with an nVidia driver (like the parent)? I've only had that issue with some newer ATI cards.
It's not complete *****. All at once I've swapped a motherboard, processor (went from 4-yr old Athlon 3000+ to a Core 2 Quad) and video card (went from Radeon 9800 Pro to GeForce 8600GTS) from underneath the same, ~2 year old installation of Kubuntu and it didn't bat an eye.
XP almost didn't, but its networking never came back to life... - Speed, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1You managed to swap motherboards and CPUs in Windows? It usually gives a BSOD when you do that (unless you hack the crap out of it)
- gameforge, on 04/12/2008, -0/+1You had this problem with an nVidia driver (like the parent)? I've only had that issue with some newer ATI cards.
- carpespasm, on 04/12/2008, -0/+4I'm an Ubuntu fan, but I don't think of it that way. My laptop still has bugger-all for wireless drivers.
- gameforge, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2Well, I can positively attest to Intel Centrino as well as D-Link, Cisco and Linksys cardbus cards all working flawlessly on laptops I've used. Flawlessly meaning you're getting updates during installation and your Internet is perfect and ready when you first log in.
I hope support for your particular card improves; I know that mobile wireless adapters are a bit pricier than desktop ones (which still gives the Linux/WiFi argument some merit with respect to laptops).
- gameforge, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2Well, I can positively attest to Intel Centrino as well as D-Link, Cisco and Linksys cardbus cards all working flawlessly on laptops I've used. Flawlessly meaning you're getting updates during installation and your Internet is perfect and ready when you first log in.
- lordtyros, on 04/12/2008, -1/+3In Ubuntu, often the proprietary video driver doesn't work. In that case, you go online, google through forums until you learn of a tool called Envy. What does Envy do? It installs video drivers. Why does it have to exist? I don't know.
- lamiaconfitor, on 04/12/2008, -1/+1you should run a system test for a PEBUK error. let us know how that comes out. alternatively, uninstall the incorrect drivers you were trying to install, recheck your Graphics card for the Model number, and install the correct drivers.
- Speed, on 04/13/2008, -1/+1I admit that in Ubuntu, it's not too bad usually. However, whenever I try other distros, I have to quit X, go into the terminal, edit a bunch of files (and being raised from DOS and Windows, the file system is all foreign to me), and if I make one mistake, it doesn't work.
And I admit I haven't tried updating the Nvidia drivers in my Vista machine lately (still in boxes due to a move), but the last time I tried, it really made the system unstable.
- smacksaw, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2I've tried installing nVidia drivers with EnvyNG and have had nothing but automated success with it. It couldn't be easier or more reliable. I've bought two new machines in the last few months and I have Vista on one and XP on the other and then Kubuntu on both. I had problems with the nVidia driver on Windows...especially on the Vista machine. BSOD. EnvyNG was 2 for 2 on both machines working perfectly, and on this machine I've installed different flavours of Linux several times and never had EnvyNG fail me, even on the 8.xx alphas.
- kahrytan, on 04/12/2008, -0/+4...By no one using it. All jokes aside.
- lamiaconfitor, on 04/12/2008, -2/+1you install a microsoft product.
- CCmachined, on 04/12/2008, -0/+1when booting a now-sub-$300 computer for the first time with Vista
- gplpark92, on 04/12/2008, -18/+8IMO Windows XP remains and will remain (for the next year at least) the most reliable, stable, and overall preferred OS out there. In all honesty, Linux is great for specialized needs and old PC's, but on most modern home systems, its nothing but a waste of space (granted, not much space, but still, its useless).
The combination of driver and performance issues in Vista resulted in these negative opinions. The truth is, Vista is designed very well for the user, maximizing organization and productivity, however, if it doesn't even work properly, then you're simply left with several gigabytes of wasted space containing a bloated OS which focuses too heavily on looks and proprietary formats, drivers, and software.- Aharoni, on 04/12/2008, -2/+27I have a strong laptop which works with Vista and it works great. I think you just need to give it time. I think the only difference between Vista and XP is that Vista came to a world filled with angry bloggers.
- therightclique, on 04/12/2008, -5/+1"strong laptop"?????!??!!??
- Optimaximal, on 04/12/2008, -1/+5I'm taking that to mean 'decent', as in 'I spent more than £100 on it'...
- therightclique, on 04/12/2008, -5/+1"strong laptop"?????!??!!??
- FatShady, on 04/12/2008, -2/+11That's odd. It works great for me. You must just be an idiot.
An OS that "focuses too heavily" on drivers and software? What the hell does that even mean?
Please. If you don't understand what you're talking about, don't talk about it. - KMartSheriff, on 04/12/2008, -4/+8Oh please. The rest of the world is going to move to Vista just like they did with XP when it came out, and you probably will too. Stop being so dramatic.
- LemmingJesus, on 04/12/2008, -0/+4First, you can't get more proprietary than Apple and second, doesn't OS X install like every single printer driver there is?
- tcpip4lyfe, on 04/12/2008, -0/+1You have no idea what you're talking about.
- Aharoni, on 04/12/2008, -2/+27I have a strong laptop which works with Vista and it works great. I think you just need to give it time. I think the only difference between Vista and XP is that Vista came to a world filled with angry bloggers.
- eminiguy, on 04/12/2008, -22/+4Please, don't panic. MS is here to stay for a while. A decade, at least.
Considering that Americans are getting dumber by the minute, MS will have clients for many years to come.
As far as Yahoo deal is concerned, MS will never get Yahoo. I have said this before and I am saying it now again. Mark my words.- tomwhughes, on 04/12/2008, -1/+11talk about a generalisation,
and I'm not even American.- therightclique, on 04/12/2008, -2/+1we would have known that by the way you spelled generalization. why we replaced everything with Z's is anyone's guess. Could be that they sound like Z's. Who knows....
- Dantetheinferno, on 04/12/2008, -3/+10Sorry for not wanting to learn how to code before I can use a computer. I must be your "dumb" American.
- tomwhughes, on 04/12/2008, -1/+11talk about a generalisation,
- bloggersmosiac, on 04/12/2008, -12/+2everytime there is new os you hear the same story @ end all buy it and microsoft win and we all ..... give us break nothing worse than windows millenium
bloggersmosaic.com- therightclique, on 04/12/2008, -0/+3wait. you're a blogger and that's all the better you can form sentences? ***** *****.
- toxicityj, on 04/12/2008, -19/+151I don't get it...Vista alone has more market share than os x and linux combined and somehow Vista is the one collapsing? http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid= ...
- grumpyrain, on 04/12/2008, -5/+70pfft, using facts to back up your point, buried
/sarcasm - thecheatah, on 04/12/2008, -13/+8Other OS's are starting to eat up the share which MS once had. Meaning the people who are giving up XP arn't necessarily going to vista.
- Shadowgamers, on 04/12/2008, -2/+9'Other OS's are starting to eat up the share which MS once had'
Albeit slowly- lamiaconfitor, on 04/12/2008, -0/+2Yeah, cause companies tend to wait until they loose allot of market share until they do anything about it. /sarcasm.
- FatShady, on 04/12/2008, -5/+10Yeah, and they're certainly doing it quickly. It's really obvious that *everybody* wants to use those other operating systems.
- carpespasm, on 04/12/2008, -2/+1Apple's gotten a lot of the youth market with the halo effect from iPode sales. Everyone I've set up and fixed computers for that has Vista told me how they didn't like it in one way or another without me even saying anything. I've had a couple people ask me to switch them to Ubunutu when I'd use the live cd to back up their stuff before a reinstall of XP. I know that just a couple years ago no one would have asked for whatever live cds were out there over XP.
- Nayson, on 04/12/2008, -3/+2And others (like me) who have a machine with Vista on will certainly not be using a Microsoft OS when they upgrade their computer next time.
- lupuz2k, on 04/12/2008, -2/+2they're eating it up... 1/10th of a percent a time
- Shadowgamers, on 04/12/2008, -2/+9'Other OS's are starting to eat up the share which MS once had'
- init100, on 04/12/2008, -9/+14Vista only has that market share because it is preloaded on almost all new PCs. It isn't like all those people chose Vista over the competition (including XP). Most would probably have been pretty content with Windows XP, but that option isn't really available, because Microsoft decided that it's time for everyone to move to Vista.
- bentman78, on 04/12/2008, -9/+3Some manufacturers are putting linux preloaded on their systems, like Dell. People don't want them.
- carpespasm, on 04/12/2008, -3/+9There might be a page buried in Dell's website where people who already know about Ubuntu can go to get a machine preloaded, but your argument is crap until I see as many Linux machines as windows machines in stores and people keep buying windows more often.
- veilrap, on 04/12/2008, -1/+6People don't want linux machines in stores. The general populous doesn't give two ***** about using an OSOS
- lordtyros, on 04/12/2008, -2/+20And Leopard only has its market share because it comes with new Macs. What is your point? Most people would be happy with Window 3.1 if it rarely crashed and did everything they wanted it to. Progress is forced, more often than not.
- lamiaconfitor, on 04/12/2008, -5/+2you're not kidding, the only reason I don't even want to buy a new laptop is because of Vista. and some companies make a hassle of "downgrading." LOL
- veilrap, on 04/12/2008, -1/+4I chose vista over the competition. On modern machines its better than linux (which i still dual boot anyways) and OS X is not my fancy.
- jhaks, on 04/12/2008, -0/+1If you told people "Vista will mean less malware, more security, more stability and new platforms and technologies to facilitate better applications" people would probably not pay for it. If you don't advance the technology space then it stagnates.
- bentman78, on 04/12/2008, -9/+3Some manufacturers are putting linux preloaded on their systems, like Dell. People don't want them.
- salomejones, on 04/12/2008, -10/+7Vista doesnt have a huge market share (compared to os x and linux) because it's a good operating system, it has a huge market share because it's what everyone's gotten whether they like it or not with every newly purchased PC for well over a year.
- MacSuxWindozSux, on 04/12/2008, -5/+13Most Mac users don't use OSX because it's a good OS, they use it because it comes with their computer.
- salomejones, on 04/12/2008, -7/+7Most mac users BUY their computer because they like OS X in the first place.
- toxicityj, on 04/12/2008, -0/+4no they buy them because they enjoy spending thousands for mediocre hardware.
- Optimaximal, on 04/12/2008, -4/+8No, I think you'll find most people buy Macs (like most Apple hardware) because they have a large pile of cash burning a hole in their pocket/account and want to buy a fashion accessory that isn't a car.
Then they spend hours wondering why the close buttons on the windows are on the left, there's no start button and Internet Explorer has a compass for an icon rather than a blue e... True story :) - gdehms, on 04/12/2008, -1/+3I find that most Mac user buys macs for the following 3 reasons: 1) It comes preloaded with a few apps they like (garageband), 2) They like the sexy look, or 3) They blindly believe everything they hear in the commercials. Only the first one is actually an understandable reason.
I was talking with a friend about Macs and he just started saying things like, "Macs get less viruses" "Macs are more stable" "Macs run faster". Macs get less viruses because of less market share. Macs aren't more stable, I've been having to spend some time lately using one for photoshop work and it hangs up every once and a while, which my windows machine doesn't. Macs also feel slower than my pc with XP on it.
- salomejones, on 04/12/2008, -7/+7Most mac users BUY their computer because they like OS X in the first place.
- MacSuxWindozSux, on 04/12/2008, -5/+13Most Mac users don't use OSX because it's a good OS, they use it because it comes with their computer.
- colincornaby, on 04/12/2008, -7/+8They're looking at the general trend. Windows Vista is selling worse than previous versions, while Linux and Apple marketshare is increasing. Microsoft, being the majority, should have crushed both Linux and Apple like ants by now. The fact that they haven't been able to implies that Windows, despite having a high market share, is actually in decline. Not to mention, with Window's overall marketshare growing smaller, they literally do have a declining marketshare.
- LemmingJesus, on 04/12/2008, -2/+1The fact they haven't is because of all the anti trust lawsuits. You do know Microsoft bailed Apple out when they were going bankrupt, right?
- carpespasm, on 04/12/2008, -1/+4you know microsoft only kept apple in business to keep from being broken up for being a total monopoly right?
- replikhant, on 04/12/2008, -2/+4Show me facts Lemmingjesus or I will dismiss this as another Vistaboy outburst.
- toxicityj, on 04/12/2008, -0/+3MS is crushing its competition. What the hell do you think 90% marketshare is?
- usingpond, on 04/12/2008, -2/+2Yes, but it is decreasing rapidly, at a rate which Microsoft would not like to continue.
- LemmingJesus, on 04/12/2008, -2/+1The fact they haven't is because of all the anti trust lawsuits. You do know Microsoft bailed Apple out when they were going bankrupt, right?
- mrmx, on 04/12/2008, -2/+1mindshare can evaporate very quickly! i.e. I'm planning to get a MAC and look forward to using it with my keyboard! of course Microsoft will benefit when its employees start to have fear since they'll push themselves to "one up" their competitors and, besides, I think Microsoft invested in Apple when it was almost dead and, thus, success at Apple means success for Microsoft!
- grumpyrain, on 04/12/2008, -5/+70pfft, using facts to back up your point, buried
- digitallysick, on 04/12/2008, -22/+4windows needs your permission to continue "ok cancel" (screen black all work stopped) clicked ok, BSOD, your computer shut down to prevent damage...