Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
Shannon VanWagner
1059 Followers
caffieneman
904 Followers
agmlauncher
891 Followers
lemurdaddy
135 Followers
Crapolatime
449 Followers
timthetaxman
151 Followers
Kees Den Hartigh
454 Followers
Johnny Five O
76 Followers
agmlauncherFeb 17, 2011
What OS is on a PC doesn't matter much because the PC as a platform is becoming less and less relevant as smart phones and tablets become more and more capable.
PCs will always occupy a niche for power users and businesses, but those power users would probably run something other than Windows anyway.
The real meat and potatoes of casual user operating systems will center around smart phones and tablets, which is a war Microsoft has already lost completely.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountFeb 17, 2011
Very bold and unfounded statements that you are making, Agmlauncher, considering the fact that the "war" that you are speaking of has just only begun.
shustoneFeb 17, 2011
I agree with SeaSaints. Broad predictions for things that have just begun.
omarbonillaFeb 17, 2011
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Throughout my time at Digg (since '05 under moniker omarciddo) there have been claims of "The Year of Linux." Normally this was laughed off but what agmlauncher is saying has gained credibility over time.
The desktop or laptop OS has become less relevant over time. Attention has shifted toward phones and touch tablets. The desktop OS is losing relevance, and fast as these devices become more and more compatible on Windows, Mac, and Linux.
These statements are hardly "unfounded" as anyone who has payed attention to the tech world in recent years has seen. The desktop will soon serve as as sort of "permanent cloud" while portable tablets and smartphones dominate the tech sphere.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
norman619Feb 18, 2011
I wasn't aware that I could edit video and photos as well as do 3D animation and modeling on a smartphone... Now I feel silly spending $1500 on building a new graphics workstation and gaming rig. I didn't know all I really needed was a iPhone or a Blackberry.
darthsnoopyFeb 18, 2011
you dummy. You can watch movies on a smartphone too! If you can't do it on a smartphone, it's not worth doing!</s>
trollspottingFeb 18, 2011
o_O
lnmagicFeb 18, 2011
I still do not want a smart phone. I have not been impressed with their battery life and high rate of obsoleting. Every generation of phones seems to get better, but I like the "freebie" phones that only need to be charged once or twice a week - that's something I'd forget to do every day.
Now, isn't is more than reasonable to assume that smart phones can sell as a complement to established, more powerful computers?
norman619Feb 18, 2011
Most people want a regular phone not a smartphone.
mmilitiaFeb 17, 2011
This article shoud've had the title: "Could 2011 be the year of Linux?"
I'm pretty sure they re-publish the same thing every year and just change the dates.
rblancarteFeb 18, 2011
They should make it really easy:
We were wrong in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.
But this time we mean it: 2011 is the year of Linux!!!
estvirFeb 18, 2011
They would make great Christians, those Linux enthusiasts.
It's ridiculous to expect such an empire used by millions (Billions ?) of people to crumble in one year, what would be required for that to be happen in sheer awesome in trying to imagine it.
A good start would be saying "Could 2010-210 be the DECADE of Linux?" for that is more realistic. Rome was not built in a day and it's downfall while apparently quick was not a single day.. and the time being those 2 events was quite long.
Disclaimer: I am not history buff, please ignore any mistakes in this loose analogy. ;)Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
dirtyfriesFeb 17, 2011
Nope, they still hold around 90% marketshare, and most of the world still runs on it.
There's room for other offerings, but at the end of the day, people as a whole, especially business, aren't going anywhere.
Linux needs to stop saying "this is our year" and just concentrate on creating something people want.
timthetaxmanFeb 17, 2011
I think Ubuntu or Mint are ready for the move to the mainstream (except for PC gamers), but no one wants to pay to market a free product. Most people I know have no clue that there is anything out there but Windows and Apple.
They only reason I still use Windows on one of my computers is for gaming.
Closed AccountFeb 17, 2011
Steam will fix that in a heart beat.
timthetaxmanFeb 17, 2011
It can be done, but as much as I like Linux, I have to admit it is not ready for mainstream AAA gaming applications. However, neither is OS X for the most part.
People just want it to work without all of the tweaking and headaches. Not to mention the huge performance loss when playing games on a non-native platform.
On the bright side, it is ready for basically everything else. I have a couple family members who know nothing about computers running ubuntu and they haven’t had any problems.
miklkitFeb 17, 2011
Steam broke Half Life last May, and it is still broke. You are betting on a lame horse.
etrnldrkFeb 18, 2011
It's all about Fallout 3 and New Vegas, man. Half-Life is old gen.
largentFeb 17, 2011
The only reason I still use *nix is for hosting services.
I really don't understand the big push for Linux to 'takeover' desktop computing. W7 on my desktop freeBSD on the server.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mattbdFeb 18, 2011
Have you tried some of the more user-friendly Linux distros lately? Ubuntu makes a pretty good desktop. I've got two computers that dual-boot Windows (XP on one, 7 on another) and I can't remember the last time I used them. I've even largely stopped using my MacBook in favour of Ubuntu Netbook Edition.
largentFeb 18, 2011
I've used Ubuntu, Fedora, Suse, Debian, CentOS, BT etc etc etc
I suspect I'll make a more permanent switch if I ever find something I need that my Windows box cannot do; that hasn't happened yet though...
Especially with deals like W7 for students for like 20 or 30 bones? Load that baby up with open source and you've spent practically nothing :O
mattbdFeb 18, 2011
I think Unix in general is a better environment for programming. It's so full of insanely powerful programming tools (Vim, emacs, Python, Perl, GCC, make - the list goes on) that you can quite happily rely solely on the shell for programming purposes in a way that isn't practical with Windows (unless you install Cygwin)
Granted, Windows has plenty of IDE's available for programming purposes, but so do Linux and OS X, so on those platforms you have a choice of using either an IDE or the shell. If you're doing .NET development, then Windows is obviously going to be the better platform, but even then you could do it on Linux or OS X using Mono.
norman619Feb 18, 2011
Actually no. You see, the problem is the lack of mainstream software vendor support. It's simply not there. This is what makes Linux of any flavor not quite ready for primetime.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
jdmulloyFeb 17, 2011
Not sure what they're smoking. Phil McKinney said that webOS on PCs would run on top of Windows "natively". While I'd love to see webOS as some sort of instant on OS (which it certainly isn't on any current Palm phones) ala Express Gate I'm still thrilled about this move for one reason APPS. They have a hard enough time getting Apps for webOS phones and now tablet because of low/non-existent market share. If they make it possible to run webOS apps on Windows PCs too, then all of a sudden webOS has huge market share. A deveolper can write an App once in Enyo and it will work on PCs, the TouchPad and webOS phones. Imagine Tweetdeck rewritten in Enyo. This would be huge for enterprise apps. Write once run anywhere, like Java but without the crappy performance.
http://www.precentral.net/mckinney-webos-be-integrated-windows-pcs
bluenileFeb 17, 2011
since 1995
kaufeenxFeb 17, 2011
Until there is available software for Linux that normal people (and by normal I mean people like your grandmother) then there will never be a widespread adoption of Linux. It's unfortunate, but true.
mdwstmusikFeb 17, 2011
What is this software on Linux that Grandma can't use?
What is more difficult about using a browser, email client, media player, image organizer, or office program on Linux vs Windows?
samoutFeb 18, 2011
It's difficult because the taskbar is on the top instead of bottom by default, oh the humanity! /s
Seriously, because of people like him (constantly complaining about Linux being difficult) the OS's are getting so retardedly easy... Everything is automated, even more than Windows.
"You have new updates",
"Do you wish to do this or that",
"There seems to be a driver missing. I will now fetch it and install it without you having to do anything, even re-open the media player/browser etc.. just wait 10 seconds and everything's dandy"
^ Windows doesn't do that s**t. Google would be out of business if it did, lol... "K-Lite Codec Pack" plz google, "Nvidia drivurz plox"...
kaufeenxFeb 21, 2011
You're thinking of it from the mind of someone who grasps the concepts of advanced computing and clearly not from the mind of an average user. I don't agree with people who say linux is difficult, but I can see where they're coming from. I have used many different flavors of Linux myself over the past 15 years even using it as my primary OS at times. The problem isn't the common applications that ship with EVERY OS, the problem is when you run into software that only supports Windows and to which there is no alternative. Mac OS has the same issue, less so now, but its there. Stop being an angry superuser and actually think about the end users who think you're just an anime watching pussy.
samoutFeb 21, 2011
Actually I'm a pretty new Linux user... Two years ago I thought Linux was only for people who are horrified by graphical user interfaces, only drink cola and code stuff, lol. You're correct though, the support for some software is WEAK. But regular joes do not care about having Adobe Flash, Ableton Live or Photoshop. All they care is that "Youtube works" and that it has a media player.
Same with all of my friends ("No!! You are NOT putting a *gasp* Linux on my laptop, holy crap... I just want to surf the internet."). Now all of them have a Linux-distro as their main OS, and constantly say stuff like "Wow, you couldn't do this in Windows without googling for hours", or "So cool that people do open source stuff for it, like I just found this Tetris-style game from that Synaptic-thingie!", or "OMG this compiz is soo cool!" :D Or "You're really saying this thing doesn't need a firewall or virus protection?!"
None of my non tech-savvy friends have Windows installed on their laptops anymore.. Me and this other guy are the only ones still having it (we're music producers, and Linux's support for music software is pretty weak... LMMS for example has a horrible interface).
TL;DR: It's just a myth (these days) that they are more difficult to use than Windows. Hell, even the installation is easier in distros like Ubuntu. Just click a few buttons and you're set.
comgenFeb 17, 2011
First excuse my mangling of enGERlish grammar......and randomness.
Its been a busy day.
There are only a few programs/app suites that Linux in general does not support either native or using wine. The biggest issue I see when compared with Windows software, for example Office vs. OpenOffice is the user using OO is required to do things per correct data entry/creation, whereas Office relies on wysiwyg heavily. There are some spreadsheet conversion issues still, mainly due to VBS and again people not taking the time to learn how to properly uses such tools. Most Office to OO migration headaches I have ran into are generally user related, eg. forms under word - the user will hit enter at the end of the field and it wraps under, in word you generally do not see this error, when opened in OO the fields expand thus the doc format is shifted....easily fixed. Office users also tend to not use templates and/or lock down docs which results in format mangling...suppose the same is true about OO users as well.
Late 90's to present I have installed Linux in 1000's of mixed environments, general office, server/db backend, firewall/content filter, workstation, edu's, Library, labs, home desktop, media centers, etc. Most recent contract was implementing Linux in lab environments for people with mental and physical disabilities. Overall the project has been a great success, the individuals are able to interact well with the GUI (gnome/LXDE), educational software k-12 and advanced adult levels, screen readers, touch, special needs enhancements/hardware, art related, general class learning material and access to online resources, edu based CMS, etc. Matter of fact the individuals seem to function extremely well vs. the instructors/teachers..several in the class actually maintain the systems and provide assistance ( for teachers as well ). Lab hardware is mixed, 400MHz - 2.6GHz, 256MB-1GB ram, one lab has been up and running low-end hardware and Linux for 4+ yrs with only a few burps. Often, when the Windows workstations go down ( office staff ) you'll find them in the lab doing just about anything they would normally do, connecting to accounting DB, email, RDP connections, docs, web design, audio/video communications, etc. Linux desktops - Windows to gnome, KDE, XFCE.....the learning curve is much less than say XP to Win7 (vista). Administration is much simpler in terms of every day end-user usage...once apps and the system has been configured, there little need to do much hood-work. From the SysAdmin point of view, not having to deal with license, headaches of windows update bloat, major security issues, or having to re-key when moving to newer hardware a big plus. The lab systems can be easily managed via lan, rolling out multiple new or update images to all machines at once (eg. 20 workstations in one lab)...easy create new image, connect to lab lan, point-click, wait a few minutes, send reboot command, get back to class work.
Far as the average end-user home/office desktop goes, I run a wide range of apps, CAD, network/system monitoring, Office apps, various IDE's ( build environments ), virtual machines, many windows based apps under wine, audio/video, you name it. Similar configurations provided for customers, family, friends covering all education levels/ages/computer knowledge and/or business....other than the occasional end-user related issue or hardware burp....Linux in general has been extremely friendly to all. I have setup systems for people which asked "what version of windows is this" after a few days of using and showing to others.
My systems are tools, which most end-users do not fully grasp...meaning eye candy (yes available under Linux) is not a factor. However, most end-users tend to gauge the OS/Desktop by the prettiness and less on what it can do. Windows is also less resource friendly, the OS tends to eat as much as it can....while Linux balances resources so that apps ( tools ) can be utilized...personally I can not justify an OS eating up 50% or more of my resources ( 2.6GHz - 2GB ram ) when it can be used by my current work task/app. Over the past year we have been slowly replacing an office ( used/current/new 200+ systems/servers ) with Linux / MAC / Mobile, you can see a big difference in performance between Windows and Linux running on identical hardware and each setup provides identical apps.
I'm not suggesting Linux does not have its share of headaches, it does but by far much less than Windows. I've been in the professional computer/tech/server/sales business since the mid 90's - Windows shop based.
See also: http://distrowatch.com http://www.ubuntu.com http://goo.gl/poqXTComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mattbdFeb 18, 2011
Most people's grandmothers can't use Windows for s**t either. Their computers wind up full of malware and software they don't need, and running at a crawl.
The other day I spent ages on the phone to my aunt trying to explain how to download and install Chrome and it was ridiculous how much hassle it was. What was she using? Windows Vista. If she were running Ubuntu, I could have emailed her a simple series of commands that she could paste into the terminal to do it.
Windows is in most ways a lot harder to use than Ubuntu, it's just that people are used to the quirks of Windows so they don't see them that way. For instance, people often say "Linux isn't ready for the desktop because you have to edit text files to change some settings". As compared to the utter ease of editing the registry in Windows?
tobindrakeFeb 17, 2011
If you want to replace WIndows, you need to create a BETER version of Windows. People DO NOT want unix/linux. It is for computer geeks and trying to push it on grandma is just stupid. Ok, all you linux programmers out there - offer a free version of Windows that works better than what Microsoft offers (shouldn't be hard - you just need a couple of billion dollars to market it and an army of volunteers to work on it for 10 years). Then we can say goodbye to Microsoft.
phillaholicFeb 18, 2011
You really have no idea what your talking about do you?
kcswankoFeb 18, 2011
no, he's right
etrnldrkFeb 18, 2011
Care to elaborate?
blackjackjesterFeb 18, 2011
I argue he's right. Windows is the most functional operating system. The old analogy still persists:
If you want to do a few things extremely well - Apple
want to do most things pretty good - Windows.
Want to do absolutely anything, but it's all a pain in the ass? Linux.
Same goes for the smartphone market:
Iphone - do a few things really well
android - do anything you want, quality questionable
winphone7 - do most things you want - does them all pretty well.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
trollspottingFeb 18, 2011
That may have been true a decade ago, but the only two things Windows has over OS X at this point is "gaming" and "old random purpose built Win XP apps for specific business needs".
OS X is the easiness of Windows and the power of Linux, but you have to pay for it, which upsets a lot of people for some reason.
phillaholicFeb 18, 2011
I personally think Windows 7 UI is better then OSX in a few ways, though OSX is organized so much nicer. Ubuntu is actually looking very OSX like lately, and is a very capable operating system stock.
I think the tinkering argument is largely an unfair one, since the vast majority of the world get's their operating system pre-installed by their vendor. If Ubuntu was sold by the vendor, they wouldn't ship it without something working. Driver support has come a long way in the last five years or so. Most companies now have official drivers so it's really not the pain the ass that most people think. The only problem I had with Ubuntu lately was with a brand new laptop. 11.04 will be completely compatible though.
trollspottingFeb 18, 2011
I have used Linux professionally for over a decade, and I don't use it on my personal machines or work machines, because I know it's still a pain in the ass and still sucks in an office setting. OpenOffice? *barf*
Since I've used Windows since 3.1, I also no longer wish to waste me time on worrying about viruses, corrupt registries, and every other Windows specific annoyance, so what is left for me is OS X.
Once Linux just works, and Windows... well, Windows just isn't for advanced users and never will be since it saves you from yourself even when you don't want it to, so once Linux just works perfectly in an office setting, I'll try again.
But I swear if I need to futz with X11 for one more second on a laptop I'm going to lose my s**t.
crdeutschFeb 17, 2011
"Windows" means desktop OS for the most part correct? I haven't even seen anybody using a Linux Desktop in years let alone use one myself. Unless you want to include OSX under the Linux umbrella, I'd say Desktop Linux is practically dead. Nice link bate title though.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
phillaholicFeb 18, 2011
OSX is not Linux. Desktop Linux is not dead, it's very usable, and very well supported.
crdeutschFeb 18, 2011
Yes, I realize OSX has BSD roots and is not Linux. The point is everybody I know who used to be into Linux runs OSX now. Just sick of reading "Windows is dead" headlines when I haven't seen a Linux Desktop in years.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
phillaholicFeb 18, 2011
It's a bit dramatic, but there has never been as many non-windows devices then right now. A lot of them run some form of Linux, Android included. Ubuntu for one is in some ways easier to use then Windows 7, as long as they aren't any hardware incompatibilities (usually from official drivers not being released.) My Dad has been running Ubuntu on his laptop for about two years now and has everything he needs (Firefox, VLC and which ever music player he uses I don't remember). There's no reason for him to drop so much money on Windows when he doesn't need anything Windows has that Ubuntu doesn't.
trollspottingFeb 18, 2011
Totally true. Running Linux for your own desktop or laptop is still overly painful, which is why Google, Facebook, and the like, actually use OS X almost exclusively at this point, even though a lot of their production machines are CentOS or Debian based.
Linux is great as a server, but it sucks for personal use. That's just the way it is.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mattbdFeb 18, 2011
I've pretty much stopped using my MacBook in favour of Ubuntu. For what I use it for, Ubuntu is less grief.
etrnldrkFeb 18, 2011
Is this the same thing as a tree falling in the woods and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound? Just because you don't use it, doesn't mean that it's not used by millions of others in the world. You may be surprised by what tech you interact with daily is running something other than Windows.
crdeutschFeb 18, 2011
No actually I wouldn't. I'm a pretty hard core geek. I just don't waste my time tinkering with solved problems like a desktop OS anymore and I'm reminding you Linux fan boys that in the real world I hear less about Linux on the Desktop now then I have over the last 10 years. Good to know some of you are still out there though. You should try Windows 7 sometime or OSX. You might like it, or if nothing else you might get a glimpse of what Linux Desktop will look like in 3-5 years.
phillaholicFeb 18, 2011
Linux changes much faster then Windows or OSX. You should take a look at Ubuntu or Mint to see what they've added since the latest version of those other two OS's shipped. Not only is is usable, there are still many things Windows hasn't caught up on yet.
mattbdFeb 18, 2011
I bought a MacBook in 2008 and I did like it, but in the last year or so I've slowly moved back to Ubuntu. Partly because my Dell Mini's a hugely convenient machine to use, and partly because I've actually found that for what I use it for, Ubuntu's far less grief than OS X.
I've been learning Perl, and I've found that Apple's implementation is a lot worse than Ubuntu's - I was forever having problems when I tried to install modules via CPAN. Also, the absence of a package manager means I'm faced with a choice of either installing a package manager that doesn't ship with the OS (which I'm very dubious about) or compiling a fair number of CLI applications and libraries from source.
kcswankoFeb 18, 2011
Haha, wow 2011 and another "Year of Linux" article.
If anything it's Anroid and iOS, then Windows.
Linux, funny
etrnldrkFeb 18, 2011
Lol, ANDROID is Linux.
trollspottingFeb 18, 2011
Can't tell; troll, or noob?
meedFeb 18, 2011
Windows 7 has been a outstanding success (especially compared to vista's reception). Windows won't go down anytime soon. Sure Linux is a great OS, but there is a heavy learning curve for using it, and most of the population has been using MS software for so long that they will simply keep purchasing windows for their computers. Not to mention that the commercial software market still hasn't warmed up to linux, without these applications and games I have a outstanding reason NOT to migrate to linux.
etrnldrkFeb 18, 2011
The same can be said about switching from (insert other OS's here) to Windows, if the said user has no Windows experience. Not only that, most commercial is overrated and overpriced and has a free alternative somewhere in the Linux/BSD world.
norman619Feb 18, 2011
Linux is a great server OS. It's not so good as a mainstream OS because it does not run most of the popular applications out there. Windows is still king. OSX has a better shot at dethroning Windows than Linux does but not by much.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
etrnldrkFeb 18, 2011
It may not be mainstream, but my 10 year old daughter has no problem with it. My technology challenged mother also uses Ubuntu with no issues. As I have said before, there are free and great alternatives out there for most commercial software on the market.
norman619Feb 18, 2011
As long as you are there to be their tech support it's fine. If all you do is basics then it's fine for you. The fact is most people do a bit more than the basics.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
etrnldrkFeb 19, 2011
Funny you mention that, my mother is 600 miles away from me, and the only things she calls about is to ask how I'm doing, let me know how my sis is doing in school, and ask what I'm doing for holidays. You underestimate the user-friendliness of modern Linux desktops.
My daughter, on the other hand, lives with me and doesn't touch a computer without my wife or myself nearby. Any issues she has are user account restrictions set in place to prevent anything inconvenient happening with the system while she uses it (and prevent access to stuff on the web she shouldn't be getting in to).
I'm willing to bet that if you asked either one of them what operating system they are using, they'd probably tell you Dell (my mother) or the one in the living room (my daughter). They don't care as long as it will play music, surf the web, create documents for work or school, watch youtube, or play games on websites (or solitaire).
trollspottingFeb 18, 2011
Agree 100%
neotechniFeb 18, 2011
answer: no
kcswankoFeb 18, 2011
Just like OSX is Linux right? As in "they took the back bone" and made it better.
etrnldrkFeb 18, 2011
BSD ≠Linux
norman619Feb 18, 2011
How did they make BSD "better?"
trollspottingFeb 18, 2011
Better for the user, obviously.
erealzFeb 18, 2011
god i hope so windows you suck! Linux rules!
efrizzzFeb 18, 2011
The desktop or laptop OS has become less relevant over time. Attention has shifted toward phones and touch tablets. The desktop OS is losing relevance, and fast as these devices become more and more compatible on Windows, Mac, and Linux.
norman619Feb 18, 2011
Yeah right. You keep telling yourself that. When I can edit video and photos on a tablet or phone THEN we can talk. Until then you are out of your mind.
cuervoman914Feb 18, 2011
mac user?
trollspottingFeb 18, 2011
People buy tablets after they already have a desktop and/or laptop, not instead of, unless they are rich eight years olds.
jugglingjonFeb 18, 2011
Which OS you use is going to become less and less relevant as more tasks are possible online, independent of native software. However, I don't know if this will benefit linux necessarily, I would guess that the ability to integrate into those online services seamlessly will be the characteristic that makes the next big OS, and the companies best suited to do that are the ones running the services (Google, Apple, Microsoft). So I say, linux stays where it is, Chrome/Android/OSX are the ones to watch.
mdwstmusikFeb 18, 2011
Chrome and Android are Linux and OSX is basically BSD with a pretty face.
talonhFeb 18, 2011
Good god who digs this kind of garbage. A submission about responses on Slashdot to HP's WebOS announcement? Calling Slashdot commenters, Slashdot bloggers? So what we have here is a submission about Slashdot responses to an article.
A line like "Slashdot blogger hairyfeet -- a self-proclaimed Windows fan -- saw it differently." should be a nice red flag that the article is not worth your time.
camilos007Feb 18, 2011
2006 : Windows is dead, this is the year of Linux
2007 : Windows is dead, this is the year of Linux
2008 : Windows is dead, this is the year of Linux
2009 : Windows is dead, this is the year of Linux
2010 : Windows is dead, this is the year of Linux
2011 : Windows is dead, this is the year of Linux
I see a pattern over here.
mkautzFeb 18, 2011
Short answer: No.
fbawasantaFeb 18, 2011
I've been a die hard Linux user for a few years... but until we get more commercial applications that run natively, the "death of Windows" will come slow. I still run Windows on my gaming rig and Studio. I've tried to substitute commercial tools/applications with open source, but there is still just too much "tweaking" to get them to work the same as in Windows and OSx.
I can't wait for the day that I can completely replace my windows boxes with Ubuntu. The same hardware that burps, pauses and sneezes in Win7.. is butter smooth in Ubuntu. BUT...I'd take the hiccups because there are no professional equivalents to some applications for linux. There are just some things (USB/firewire audio interfaces + Jack audio etc)... like external hardware that is just too hard to set up in Linux and expect to run reliably. You install it, tweak it for 4 hours, get a kernel update and bam... it's dead again.
For the basics though, I love linux.
mobiscreenFeb 18, 2011
linux is better than windows
MrAntonBFeb 18, 2011
This has been said over and over for the past decade. It's not going to happen anytime soon. Microsoft didn't get to the top by releasing a s**tty product (though it has happened). Windows 7 is a solid piece of software, and so far the least frustrating Windows version I've ever dealt with. I've tried Mac OS X, Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Mint OS, Red Hat, Mandriva and many more linux/unix distros, and none of them hold a candle to Windows 7.
Frankly, I really like Windows 7. Been using it since the beta days, and I'm pleased with the user experience I've been getting.
exspasticcomicsFeb 18, 2011
Why cheer for Microsoft in the first place? Monopolies suck, DRM sucks, patent whores suck.. that stupid paper clip guy sucks....the whole world economy is totally screwed up because Bill Gates & like.. 6 other guys have the entire world's money supply. They don't even care anymore- they just call up Bill gates while he on the toilet taking a dump & are all like- 'Bill! We need to put a new version out!' & Bill just randomly shouts out some random color for the new box & tells them to look at what everyone else is doing for a desktop & just sort of do that. (Then he hangs up the phone & pushes out another log.)
That's what wrong with this country anymore. Everyone wants the same car, the same department store, the same OS, same ice cream flavor...
the lights really gone out of people.
atomic1fireFeb 19, 2011
Mac's sales are probably higher now.
Mac gaming has improved a bit.
and ipad is competing with net-books..
Windows 7 might find it'self on a tablet, but Ipad will probably be far better known then any windows 7 tablet.
Windows phones have fallen out of popularity compared to android and the iPhone.
It's not the same old windows dominance anymore.
even Internet explorer is losing favor.
Linux might not be "out there" but it's in people's android phones.
Pdub_killaFeb 18, 2011
I haven't had a machine running windows in a few years, Vista was the last straw.
atomic1fireFeb 19, 2011
Dugg for being the first it's the year of linux post since digg 4.
Robot_OrangeFeb 19, 2011
If Linux was more user friendly, I would join in. It used to be cool to tweak your computer, now it's a pain in the butt when you realize what it took to get the little output involved.
Robot_OrangeFeb 19, 2011
If Linux was more user friendly, I would join in. It used to be cool to tweak your computer, now it's a pain in the butt when you realize what it took to get the little output involved.