# Ubuntu Linux Vs. Windows Vista: The Battle For Your Desktop



## Digit_Dragon (May 10, 2007)

Check out who is the winner

*www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199201179&pgno=1&queryText=


----------



## prasad_den (May 10, 2007)

To me, ubuntu wins hands down, coz its good, and its free..!! No vista for me at least for quite some time.. And XP does its work very well till now..!!


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 10, 2007)

for me XP works fine  , i'll shift to Vista when i get the hardware to run it .

well Ubuntu is good too but not for normal "Home" uses who do a lil bit of gaming , music n multimedia . that's my thinking . although it is "Very Good" for offices where you need to do a specialized task n there it can be customized to do a single task or a set of tasks n then deployed .


----------



## Kiran.dks (May 10, 2007)

Nice comprehensive article. 
The last quote by the reviewer is very true.



> *Ubuntu's best strength is handling the ordinary task-based day-to-day stuff. Vista has a level of completeness and polish that some people find it hard to do without.*


----------



## amitava82 (May 10, 2007)

Many people say Ubuntu is not polished as Vista which is i must admit is true in certain cases. But they often forget that Vista took more than 15 years to come to current Polished stage from Windows 3.0 (I'm leaving Windows 1.0, 1985), where as Ubuntu is merely 3 Years old. There is a Huge time advantage for Windows. Also I'm leaving out driver issue, mp3 etc... everyone knows the fact. I'm pretty much confident that by the time Microsoft releases next version of Desktop OS Ubuntu will be as Polished as Vista.

I find that the author of this comparison, actually went out of his way to trash Linux. In the beginning he claims to put aside his own bias, and then IMHO fails to do so. For example, he criticizes Ubuntu for not having his HP printer driver... even while admitting that Vista didn't have a native driver either. This is neither the fault of either OS developer groups, its HP's problem, yet he gives points to Vista for this and takes a dig at Ubuntu for not having it. Actually Ubuntu developers works more harder than Microsoft developer. They just Borrow drivers from the product manufacturers where as Ubuntu developers have to reverse engineer to get a working driver.

Also the author left out Synaptic package manager saying its for Advanced users (Whats so advanced in it???) and Comparing Windows "add remove programs" tools with Ubuntu  "add remove" tools...

one more comment I'd like to quote from a poste which is very true.. The saying - "Linux is not ready for the desktop" is SO wrong ! Its not linux ! Linux has been desktop ready for years now ! Its the userbase thats not ready for desktop linux. *Please remember that Linux is not windows, so don't expect it to operate like Windows.* Linux hasnt been built to mimic windows's operability. Its a different O/S in its own right - Please treat it that way.


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 10, 2007)

amitava82 said:
			
		

> Actually Ubuntu developers works more harder than Microsoft developer. They just Borrow drivers from the product manufacturers where as Ubuntu developers have to reverse engineer to get a working driver.


 well i'l agree to that but It's not MS Developer's problem , if ubuntu developers agree to ship with propreitary drivers rather than insist on having Open Source drivers then i think their work will be much easier too n they can concentratre more on the usability part .


----------



## aryayush (May 10, 2007)

Windows Vista would be the clear winner for most people and I don't think they would be wrong.


----------



## iMav (May 10, 2007)

amitava82 said:
			
		

> Many people say Ubuntu is not polished as Vista which is i must admit is true in certain cases. But they often forget that Vista took more than 15 years to come to current Polished stage from Windows 3.0 (I'm leaving Windows 1.0, 1985), where as Ubuntu is merely 3 Years old.


 no open source OS is as polished as vista and open source has been around before windows


----------



## gxsaurav (May 10, 2007)

amitava82 said:
			
		

> Many people say Ubuntu is not polished as Vista which is i must admit is true in certain cases. But they often forget that *Vista took more than 15 years to come to current Polished stage from Windows 3.0* (I'm leaving Windows 1.0, 1985), where as Ubuntu is merely 3 Years old. There is a Huge time advantage for Windows. Also I'm leaving out driver issue, mp3 etc... everyone knows the fact. I'm pretty much confident that by the time Microsoft releases next version of Desktop OS Ubuntu will be as Polished as Vista.



Well, if you are considering that Windows 3.0 to Windows Vista time frame as 15 years then why don't you also consider Linux kernal 1.0 to kernal 2.6 timeframe too

KDE 1.0 to KDE 3.5 time frame too

GNOME 1.0 to GNOME current version time frame too.


----------



## amitava82 (May 10, 2007)

We are comparing Ubuntu with Vista and their usability NOT the kernel (BTW its not kernal) or desktop environment. if you want to compare kernel then there is already a thread comparing both the kernel with a link if you remember and the time frame would be 1985 VS 1991. Try to do fair comparison 
BTW KDE: 1996, GNOME: 1997


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 10, 2007)

amitava82 said:
			
		

> We are comparing Ubuntu with Vista and their usability NOT the kernel (BTW its not kernal) or desktop environment. if you want to compare kernel then there is already a thread comparing both the kernel with a link if you remember and the time frame would be 1985 VS 1991. Try to do fair comparison
> BTW KDE: 1996, GNOME: 1997


well mate if you're no comparing kernel then u should count development of vista to be after the last release of the OS , n that would be Windows XP with SP2 in September 2004 , then according to this Vista took just 3 years to come from the drawing board to the floor .

also if u consider the 2001 Release date of XP , then too vista took 6 years to be released , now that would be fair competition bcoz the 15 years u're counting include the development of Windows Kernel too n not just vista , also Vista Includes an almost completely reqritten kernel so development time would be taken no more than before 2001 .


----------



## gxsaurav (May 10, 2007)

Actually MS scraped the old Longhorn 4xxx builds with Plex skin which was based on Windows XP SP2 kernel with Windows server 2003 Kernel in 2003


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 10, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Actually MS scraped the old Longhorn 4xxx builds with Plex skin which was based on Windows XP SP2 kernel with Windows server 2003 Kernel in 2003


 i was gonna mention that but i thought that linux user's might not have that info n then i would hv to cite sources , etc , etc so i refrained


----------



## amitava82 (May 10, 2007)

So just wikipedia told u n u believed that MS didn't use any references from previous windows.. Its like "climbing a tree from top" or "Intel developed core 2 duo without developing P1".... Dude just use common sense.. people do not achieve everything in a flash.. It's Called EXPERIENCE that helps... If MS Developers didn't have references and access to previous Windows sources then it would have taken more than 12 years to develop Vista. Hope u guys have little business sense. u guys go visit some companies n talk to the people there. This will help you to think Logically. Just don't talk like Fanboy.

May be off topic but here is few lines from a case study I'm doing from *business week September 8 2003*


> Security experts and corporate tech purchasers say the glitches exist because Microsoft and other software companies have placed a high priority on getting products out quickly and loading them with features, rather than attending to security. They're calling on the industry -- and Microsoft in particular -- to make software more secure. Ralph Szygenda, chief information officer at General Motors Corp., got fed up when his computers were hit by the Nimda virus in late 2001. He called Microsoft executives. "I told them I'm going to move away from Windows," Szygenda recalls. "They started talking about security all of a sudden."
> 
> Last year, amid much fanfare, Microsoft launched its Trustworthy Computing initiative, a campaign it claimed would put security at the core of its software design. As part of the campaign, more than 8,500 Microsoft engineers stopped developing the upcoming Windows Server 2003 and conducted a security analysis of millions of lines of freshly written code. Microsoft ultimately spent $200 million on beefing up security in Windows Server 2003 alone. "It's a fundamental change in the way we write software," says Mike Nash, vice-president for security business. "If there was some way we could spend more money or throw more people on it, believe me, we'd do it." Yet, embarrassingly, Windows Server 2003, released in April, was one of the operating systems exploited by Blaster. The virus carried a snide message for Microsoft Chairman William H. Gates III: "Billy Gates why do you make this possible? Stop making money and fix your software!"


Too much for security..


----------



## gxsaurav (May 10, 2007)

Amit

What are you trying to say here? We all know that Vista is using old source code too, only with Vienna the kernel will be re-written from scratch.

Now if you care comparing that to Linux, then isn't Linux kernel also using code from kernel version 0.1?


----------



## iMav (May 10, 2007)

no point these guys dont understand fairness ..... ubuntu abhi bahi aya ... vista toh 1990 mein hi ban gaya tha ... this statement is more ridiculous than any provided by even the apple fan boys

and look whos talking about business sense 

kuch nahi bacha toh chalo vista ki security ke piche ....


----------



## mediator (May 10, 2007)

Why doesn't the author say anything about Gaming on VISTA? Is he afraid to reveal something?



> DRM gives power to Microsoft and Big Media.
> 
> * They decide which programs you can and can't use on your computer
> * They decide which features of your computer or software you can use at any given moment
> ...


 Source

Then some reviews
*www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070422083715451#comments
*www.intelliadmin.com/blog/2007/01/5-sins-of-vista.html

Then a major embarassment which almost everyone seems to be complaining about and which shud have been corrected in alpha testing stage itself, forget about beta!



And now for the article!


> Is Linux finally ready to take on Windows as a desktop OS? We tried out both Vista and Ubuntu on individual PCs to see which works better. Here's who won.


 So, I think the appropriate question is "IS VISTA ready to take on Xp?".

And I dunno whats the hype about being polished. The VISTA screenshots that I have seen on my friends PCs is nuthing but same as that of Xp with a little styleXP on it. THe screenshots that I see on ubuntuforums regularly look much more amazing than that! So the question that arises in my mind is that "Is VISTA finally ready to take on latest linux distros in the "polish" department"?

So since windows fanboys here usually talk about and give an excuse of average joe, then let me remind that average joe isn't concerned about the cause of "driver problems", "90% games not working", "why his file takes so much time to copy" and lots of other issues. So desktop experience on VISTA?  

I think its better to discuss about UBUNTU Vs VISTA on desktop after SP2 of VISTA!


----------



## gxsaurav (May 10, 2007)

I think I should post again an eye opener

1) 90% of games won't work On vista? Did someone tried palying those games again after installing DirectX 9c Feb 2007 package or newer on Windows Vista to get back the DirectX 9 libraries?


> DRM gives power to Microsoft and Big Media.
> 
> * They decide which programs you can and can't use on your computer
> * They decide which features of your computer or software you can use at any given moment
> ...


Again saying it, Microsoft *must* follow the rules imposed by EU, RIAA & MPAA. Why don't you blame them?

MS doesn't decide which program you run & which U don't. If this was the case then the Virus problem will seaze to exist on Windows platform cos Virus is also a program.

They don't decide, MPAA & RIAA does. They *must* support what these companies say else MS will be sued & closed.

You have all the freedom now to install any application that you do not want. They don't send there workers to your home & tell you to install WGA update on gun point. Comon Linux users talk in proper sence.

And seriously Dude, when the hell MS resitrcited anyone from using there own files? This is just stupid, written bliendly by some Anti-MS user .

The File copy bug is indeed a bug, but read again that thread. There is a fix already posted there.

Just linking to other articles on the internet won't help. Talk with your own experience

Just that, other OS users will never try to figure out things from the inside. Saying that Vista is just XP with a new skin is indeed stupid when you don't even know how many new technologies are there inside vista


----------



## mediator (May 10, 2007)

> Just linking to other articles on the internet won't help. Talk with your own experience


 Eggjactly! And I think this is exactly what was going on  before I entered...people talking with half knowledge? As u can see, I never posted my experience with VISTA save the desktop screenshots part.
And here we have users who r talking about "polishness" and  talking about "Ubuntu's best strength is handling the ordinary task-based day-to-day stuff." etc. There r plenty of people in the world who do everything that they want to do on Ubuntu. How come is that ordinary task-based day-to-day stuff?

So I think people shud spend the same time they spent with windows (or atleast 1 year or a few months in extreme) before talking about Ubuntu and vice versa. I hope the messege was quite "sensible" and clear.


----------



## iMav (May 11, 2007)

atleast we have some sane linux users also


----------



## sabret00the (May 11, 2007)

I've used XP - too good 
I've used ubuntu - good but driver issues
I've used Vista - Good but filled with bugs


----------



## infra_red_dude (May 11, 2007)

i tried vista a while ago, but uninstalled it before the trial period expired. back on my xp now. i'd say xp is a more mature OS than vista. of corz it has taken time. as somebody said vista needs some time to settle downl so may new technologies haf come up. we need time for developers to release better code compatible wid it. we need to give some time for it to mature. only then a comparision can be made. i'm a longtime windows user. been using it since the days of windows 3.1!

unless an OS has stable drivers how can u perform some real world tests on it. wait for a while. let the companies ship tested and stable drivers. then let us compare.

btw, ubuntu is a mature os, i must say. again linux was never designed to lure windows users. i've used linux from the dayz of slackware 2.2.. when it came in floppies to ubuntu 7.10. i think linux has matured over the years from being geek only to layman friendly today. hmmm.. but i think as long as we dun get distros like sabayon/dreamlinux/freespire it'll not be as popular as windows for the average joe. 

i think ubuntu shud release a non-oss version which contains free software (may not necessarily be oss, but free like codecs, drivers etc.) imagine an ubuntu distro which doesn't require u to download codecs, drivers etc. which will work will all video cards, provide hardware accn. using closed source but free drivers, play all types of multimedia files etc. who wudn't want a distro like that working out of the box and which is legal too, it wud be irresistable!! the installation of the not-included stuff and configuring is what scares away most of the users. i think the whole community needs to re-think and introduce a lot of changes in the software released. just like freespire does, let them release 2 versions. one completely OSS and other wid oss+free closed source software. this will only help in gaining more popularity and first time users will not shy away from it as even almost all of the CLI ops are now gui based.

some very well worked on desktops i've seen in linux:

*ubuntuforums.org/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/1733
*ubuntuforums.org/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/3820
*ubuntuforums.org/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/5095
*ubuntuforums.org/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/1744

this is what will make first time users feel at home. given them a familiar interface, let them play any media file.. everything out of the box. then show them the power of customisation.


----------



## iMav (May 11, 2007)

its very difficult to lure users with only codecs playing media files ... ubuntu, slax all of them are trying their level best to make their distros appeal to a normal windows user by trying to make the distros look and feel like windows but unless things are not simplified linux wont be able to cut the ice ... its very difficult for any user to shift to a new os and find that 90% of the things he knew how to operate on a windows box are entirely different on linux and unless ease of use is not given priority it wont help the cause


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 11, 2007)

amitava82 said:
			
		

> So just wikipedia told u n u believed that MS didn't use any references from previous windows.. Its like "climbing a tree from top" or "Intel developed core 2 duo without developing P1".... Dude just use common sense.. people do not achieve everything in a flash.. It's Called EXPERIENCE that helps... If MS Developers didn't have references and access to previous Windows sources then it would have taken more than 12 years to develop Vista. Hope u guys have little business sense. u guys go visit some companies n talk to the people there. This will help you to think Logically. Just don't talk like Fanboy.


 that's what i wanted to say , then y don't u also consider development time of ubuntu to include that of the Development of the Linux kernel from scratch .

Also *Ubuntu is based on debian , the developer's didn't make it from scratch* , does this ring a bell Amitav  , also Mark Shuttleworth didn't even hire new developers , he just took some from the Debian team , these developers too had earlier experience with linux development and had the Debian Source Code before them , now wouldn't that be unfair according to you


----------



## iMav (May 11, 2007)

let it be zeeshan next he is gonna say ... viena was already coded wen MS released windows 98


----------



## praka123 (May 11, 2007)

infra_red_dude said:
			
		

> i think ubuntu shud release a non-oss version which contains free software (may not necessarily be oss, but free like codecs, drivers etc.)


 Linux Mint is the distro for that!-based on Ubuntu Feisty.

*linuxmint.com/
even there are many custom Ubuntu's there-like multimedia edition,Christian,Moslem Edition!!

Open Source Rules!!Free Software Rules!!


----------



## mediator (May 11, 2007)

WTH, Ubuntu is being used to embrace religions now?


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 11, 2007)

mAV3 said:
			
		

> let it be zeeshan next he is gonna say ... viena was already coded wen MS released windows 98


 wow , similarly one of my friends said that he had some insider news that MS had coded successor to XP even before it released Win 98    and said that it was Microsoft's monopoly that it wasn't releasing newer versions .

PS: he said this bout 2 years ago , then he was new to computers n was one of those newly-introduced to Linux , n u know how those kinda ppl are


----------



## amitava82 (May 11, 2007)

Zeeshan Quireshi said:
			
		

> *Vista took just 3 years to come from the drawing board to the floor.*


Well mate thats what you are telling..


----------



## iMav (May 11, 2007)

^^prove otherwise ...


----------



## amitava82 (May 11, 2007)

^^ why you don't know that Vista used Windows 2003 Server Code base? Not just came out of nothing from *Drawing Board*..
Windows Server 2003 is kind of built on Windows 2000 on NT 4.0 on NT 3.51 on NT 3.1... Missing link you know


----------



## freebird (May 11, 2007)

^ I must say what @amitava82 signature says is the ultimate truth.take it!
may be count my siggie too!opens up ur mind


----------



## ..:: Free Radical ::.. (May 11, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Windows Vista would be the clear winner for most people and I don't think they would be wrong.


are you coming down with fever or is it just sarcasm 

I hate DRM too. thats why I remove wmp from my system everytime i install xp.
( i know you can switch it off but why bother) Too bad, i really like the wmp11 overhaul. For the same reson, i am contemplating to shift from xp to linux, probably openSUSE. fiesty fawn does have some problems with codecs i heard but man, beryl takes the cake out of vista. they are selling that just for the sake of eye candy. you can get it on Linux too and even to a limited degree on xp with wb5 and dreamrender.


----------



## nepcker (May 11, 2007)

If I had to choose between Vista and Ubuntu, I'd choose Ubuntu.

Ubuntu's currently installed on my PC, and Vista's installed on my mac, and though Vista has that additional "polishness", I think Ubuntu is still the winner.

When I finally got hang of the XP's interface, Vista came. I thought Vista would have a good UI, especially considering the fact that many things in Vista's UI were stolen from OS X's UI. But all I got was a UI that's still confusing to navigate (but in different ways).

As for Ubuntu, I had tried some other distributions of Linux before, and found them *extremely* confusing to navigate. This problem was solved with Ubuntu, and I have now got hang of Ubuntu's interface.

Ubuntu's free, so at least I don't have to pay for it.


----------



## shantanu (May 11, 2007)

amitava82 said:
			
		

> Many people say Ubuntu is not polished as Vista which is i must admit is true in certain cases. But they often forget that Vista took more than 15 years to come to current Polished stage from Windows 3.0 (I'm leaving Windows 1.0, 1985), where as Ubuntu is merely 3 Years old. There is a Huge time advantage for Windows. Also I'm leaving out driver issue, mp3 etc... everyone knows the fact. I'm pretty much confident that by the time Microsoft releases next version of Desktop OS Ubuntu will be as Polished as Vista.
> 
> I find that the author of this comparison, actually went out of his way to trash Linux. In the beginning he claims to put aside his own bias, and then IMHO fails to do so. For example, he criticizes Ubuntu for not having his HP printer driver... even while admitting that Vista didn't have a native driver either. This is neither the fault of either OS developer groups, its HP's problem, yet he gives points to Vista for this and takes a dig at Ubuntu for not having it. Actually Ubuntu developers works more harder than Microsoft developer. They just Borrow drivers from the product manufacturers where as Ubuntu developers have to reverse engineer to get a working driver.
> 
> ...


 

excuse me.. but as far as i know (correct me if i am wrong) UBUNTU is based on linux isnt it means the same platform which is from years (unix and all) (i dont have much knowledge) so you are saying windows 3.0 why not unix and all.. many things are ready made for ubuntu also.. every distro is made onyl by some enhancements made to the base RAW linux platform.. isnt it...


now for gaming department.. i played every game on VISTA they all work fine.. well i update my vista regularly and update DX too.. and for the guys saying VISTA is just polished XP they must think again and then rethink on saying a 6yr development crap... XP and VISTA are very much different from each other.. well you should just learn new things and read some literature.. 

if you only want to critisize then no one can do anything.. 

every bit in the history of developement of vista makes a difference in the future of the upcoming OS from M$.. and you should not compare an OSS with CSS. i ordered ubuntu from its site got it few days back.. i must say its a good OS, but i dont sit back and try comparing and noting down the flaws in it.. what will i get nothing.. so just think and then say what you are saying.

writing stories cant solve the issues.. just configure everything properly..

well i ask .. dont you guys have to configure ubuntu or any distro before usage , well i did , for many a things i had to configure fedora or ubuntu or rhel . they were not ready in every sense.. 

same case is with VISTA.. a little configuring is needed.. i manually do the setting for my PF & all. 

so the setting are necessary after that your OS becomes as you want it to be..

TILL DATE NO BSODS IN XP OR VISTA..



			
				nepcker said:
			
		

> If I had to choose between Vista and Ubuntu, I'd choose Ubuntu.
> 
> Ubuntu's currently installed on my PC, and Vista's installed on my mac, and though Vista has that additional "polishness", I think Ubuntu is still the winner.
> 
> ...


 
there no need to say that nepcker will only use ubuntu coz you are a M$ hater..

well for your great knowledge .. Vista's UI is not from OSX.. file a case for it if you can ...

you are the first guy saying VISTA UI to be confusing.. man do you have some common sense.. or you use your comp. with closed eyes.. there is nothing is windows UI (VISTA) thats confusing.. yeah it can be in a MAC or LINUX.. mac is a bit confusing though.. but WINDOWS NO WAY.. ask a kid about VISTA UI.. or say a kid to navigate in windows ... 

why you post BS..


----------



## nepcker (May 11, 2007)

> same case is with VISTA.. a little configuring is needed.. i manually do the setting for my PF & all.


Which side are you with? Ubuntu or Vista? 



> TILL DATE NO BSODS IN XP OR VISTA..


Yeah, Windows now restarts automatically without showing a BSOD.


----------



## ..:: Free Radical ::.. (May 11, 2007)

To each his own.


----------



## freebird (May 11, 2007)

*emergingearth.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/vista-bsod.jpg
*www.thehumorarchives.com/attachment/451/412-windows-vista.jpg
@ TILL DATE NO BSODS IN XP OR VISTA..   :
I hoped it was R(red)SOD for Vista,but no suprises!!!


----------



## shantanu (May 11, 2007)

nepcker said:
			
		

> Which side are you with? Ubuntu or Vista?


 
i am on the right side.


			
				nepcker said:
			
		

> Yeah, Windows now restarts automatically without showing a BSOD.


 
another great lie.. buddy if you dont know about windows then why you post it.. dont you know that automatic restart can be disabled.. and well BSODS onyl some to some people who dont know computing in right sense.. i didnt had any BSOD. i think once kiran said he also didnt had.. S18000 and many examples are there.. use genuine buddy and then see.. if you use pirated studd then you cant blame M$.. they say it

* counterfeit softwares may put you at risk*


----------



## faraaz (May 11, 2007)

I installed Kubuntu 7.04 very recently...and I was very disappointed. It doesn't support my ATI video card at all. I had to stick to a 800x600 resolution...yeah, I know ATI has drivers out for it, but Kubuntu is incompatible with them. There's a workaround maybe...but for me, it is very important that an OS "just works" without all this hassle.

Furthermore, I was very disappointed with the difficulty level of getting to grips with Linux. Of course, I will be the first to admit that I am a complete Linux Noob...but honestly, I am an exact example of the kind of guy Linux needs to win over to increase its user base. Its way too unintuitive to use at this point in time.

Maybe in a year or so, I'll give it another shot...but until then, I'm going to stick to Windows XP. I hate Vista..so until living without DX10 becomes unbearable, I'm not going to shift.


----------



## iMav (May 11, 2007)

@ amit thts wat evolution is based on ... unix.... linux and so on ... ape ... man so on ... so if its simple logic tht if u comparing vista and ubuntu its got to be current state or both have to compared from their first predecessor ... u cant say tht vista 1980 and ubutu 1996 .... talk sense dude ... 

Windows is an inferior product because its used by 70%+ people around the world ... and thts the reality which u need to wake up to ....

@freebird with respect to ur signature most of windows users dont work for the kgb, cia, raw, al-queda tht we need security the amount of security tht windows provides coupled with some common sense which i guess lacks in OSC and hence they say tht ubuntu came today and vista came in 1990


----------



## infra_red_dude (May 11, 2007)

mAV3 said:
			
		

> most of windows users dont work for the kgb, cia, raw, al-queda tht we need security the amount of security tht windows provides coupled with some common sense



very true. even i've never had security problems. heck, i'm not a nuclear scientist neither do i haf defence decrets in my comp!!! people are too paranoid abt security as if india's safety lies in their hands!!!

plus, count me in.. i've had no bsods so far!!!! win95 used to greet me like that.. but rarely in win98 and never in win xp!!

yes, linux has not been developed to counter windows. as i said it caters to a different breed of people. its CLI is prolly the most powerful (also all *nix). i recently read abt linux mint. well to appeal to first time users they shud be advertised in large scale. everywhere ppl see abt ubuntu,fedora etc. and first timers try it and go back to windows due to lack of knowledge. linux mint, sabayon,dreamlinux, freespire are the distros that need to be tried by first time users. it does simplify a lot of tasks. but one thing is that the whole of the OS can't be changed to mimic windows jus for the heck of first time users. if users to try out something, they shud be ready to venture out!


----------



## praka123 (May 11, 2007)

But LINUX is NOT windows is what first time windows to linux movers needs to understand.
*linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm


Also by carrying all these multimedia and other proprietory plugins and apps in GNU/Linux,it ends up in patent/something infringement ends up in sueing users.infact the right soltn may be to offer a paid Linux carrying prop formats support and more.


----------



## infra_red_dude (May 11, 2007)

well i dun understand why every linux distro shud be distributed under the gpl.... why can't there be like closed source but free apps also bundled? it'll be a big boost to linux. more ppl will adopt linux as it is free. let the oss version also continue. there are thousands of developers there.


----------



## iMav (May 11, 2007)

OSC needs to understand tht as long as ease of use is not given more attention linux will not be used by every1 ... hell i had a torid time trying to install nvidia drivers not to forget the no. of codes and lnes 1 has to type .... as long as tht a user needs to type dos like commands for simple thngs like installing drivers or using other normal stuff linux will remain an OS used by some geeks ...


----------



## mediator (May 11, 2007)

> writing stories cant solve the issues.. just configure everything properly..


 Thats the pity that a few windows fanboys want everything to be configured on linux, all codecs to be preinstalled properly, every piece of software to be preinstalled and then put their "common sense" behind when using Linux. But then everything is alright for them if they have to configure windows, install codecs and 3rd party softwares on it, and then say to use "common sense" when using windows. How ironic!
But neways they have distros like Linux mint,proprietary SUSE etc for that.



> well i ask .. dont you guys have to configure ubuntu or any distro before usage , well i did , for many a things i had to configure fedora or ubuntu or rhel . they were not ready *in every sense*..


 



> @ TILL DATE NO BSODS IN XP OR VISTA..   :
> I hoped it was R(red)SOD for Vista,but no suprises!!!


 I also thought it was RSOD!


----------



## iMav (May 11, 2007)

i never said tht i want everything pre-configured it was by 1 of ur own OSS user

what i have said and if u can read and understand simple english ... ease of use .... not everything pre-configured but simple for a user to configure ... theres a difference between them ...


----------



## kalpik (May 11, 2007)

mAV3 said:
			
		

> OSC needs to understand tht as long as ease of use is not given more attention linux will not be used by every1 ... hell *i had a torid time trying to install nvidia drivers not to forget the no. of codes and lnes 1 has to type* .... as long as tht a user needs to type dos like commands for simple thngs like installing drivers or using other normal stuff linux will remain an OS used by some geeks ...


How about just 3 clicks to install ALL drivers on your system?
*www.michaellarabel.com/index.php?k=blog&i=114


----------



## iMav (May 11, 2007)

thts good and thts wht they got to work on ease of use rather than bad mouthing MS ... bad mouthing MS will take them no wher ... but trying to make an OS more easy to use will help 

@ kalpik btw it does not work for slax


----------



## kalpik (May 11, 2007)

Yes, its currently only for Ubuntu Feisty.. But it just shows how easy things are! You just need to pick the right distro! I mean, no one can complain about linux being difficult if they pick up gentoo for "testing" or "evaluating" linux! Pick up sabayon, ubuntu feisty etc if you wanna "evaluate".


----------



## freebird (May 11, 2007)

.......also dont expect windowsmediaplayer and company in Linux.Linux is not just another windows.and .exe files u download for windows cannot be installed in Linux or for that matter any UNIX like OS's.ofcourse,emulation exists.CEDEGA can play win games in Linux.crossover office for a majority of win apps and WINE too.


----------



## blackpearl (May 11, 2007)

*Biggest Linux problem: it makes users think*


----------



## azaad_shri75 (May 11, 2007)

^^ yes most people dont like thinking business,


now I see lots of hot talks passed between great gentlemen of our forum,people talked linux this n that , windows this n that, what to say of solaris


----------



## freebird (May 11, 2007)

^Solaris wants to be like Linux.
Sun hopes for Linux-like Solaris


----------



## mediator (May 11, 2007)

> i never said tht i want everything pre-configured it was by 1 of ur own OSS user
> 
> what i have said and if u can read and understand simple english ... ease of use .... not everything pre-configured but simple for a user to configure ... theres a difference between them ...


 N i never pointed towards u "if u can read and understand simple english". Its for people who talk about preinstalled stuff,preinstalled codecs, have some kind of disability that they can't google and then say linux hasn't got this and that software. Its for people who think they can compare OS1 with OS2 where they have 10 yrs of experience with OS1 and almost null with OS2 and then keep on talking about "common sense" a lot while using windows  whereas they act and behave like lamers when using Linux! Its "nonsense" to hiberbnate ur "common sense" while using Linux u know!


----------



## saurabh.sauron (May 11, 2007)

Ubuntu is the clear winner. i tried vista and it is crap. no antivirus support, a big resource hog, no real improvements over XP and horrendous software compatibility are major irritants.

ubuntu is one of the most addictive OS's i have ever used. i can easily say ...no windows for me...


----------



## gary4gar (May 11, 2007)

shantanu_webmaster said:
			
		

> i am on the right side.
> 
> 
> another great lie.. buddy if you dont know about windows then why you post it.. dont you know that automatic restart can be disabled.. and well BSODS onyl some to some people who dont know computing in right sense.. i didnt had any BSOD. i think once kiran said he also didnt had.. S18000 and many examples are there.. use genuine buddy and then see.. if you use pirated studd then you cant blame M$.. they say it
> ...


honestly saying i am using original windows xp pro sp2 with all latest drivers & updates but still i have lost count of BSOD.

 but on ubuntu there are no bsod




*



			To develop Vista microsoft hired move Graphic artists than programers
		
Click to expand...

*


----------



## nepcker (May 11, 2007)

> there no need to say that nepcker will only use ubuntu coz you are a M$ hater..


I'm not saying Ubuntu's better because I'm a MS hater. I like MS Office (though don't really like the ribbon). NeoOffice (or rather Open Office) is good too, but it simply can't match the power of M$ office.



> well for your great knowledge .. Vista's UI is not from OSX.. file a case for it if you can ...


I'm not the lawyer/whatever for Apple to file cases against MS. 

What are the major additions to Vista's UI? I'll tell you: Aero, Flip3D, Gadgets, and Integrated Search. These are the rip-offs of Aqua, Expose, Widgets, and Spotlight respectively. 



> you are the first guy saying VISTA UI to be confusing.. man do you have some common sense.. or you use your comp. with closed eyes.. there is nothing is windows UI (VISTA) thats confusing.. yeah it can be in a MAC or LINUX.. mac is a bit confusing though.. but WINDOWS NO WAY.. ask a kid about VISTA UI.. or say a kid to navigate in windows ...


Mac's UI is confusing. Yeah, right. The mac has always been praised for having a better UI. Yes, some flaws exists but you can't have *everything* your way.

As an example of where I got confused in Vista, is to figure out my complete system config. And I mean the *detailed* config, not just RAM and the processor I have -- in one place, without a third-party software. On a mac, I just click on the apple menu and then to "About this mac" and it's all revealed. How do you do that on Vista?



> another great lie.. buddy if you dont know about windows then why you post it.. dont you know that automatic restart can be disabled.. and well BSODS onyl some to some people who dont know computing in right sense..


Well, how do you disable it? I would really like to do it. (Make sure it doesn't involve complex process.)

And yes, people who buy hardware that don't yet have drivers for Vista all don't know "computing in right sense".


----------



## gxsaurav (May 11, 2007)

> What are the major additions to Vista's UI? I'll tell you: Aero, Flip3D, Gadgets, and Integrated Search. These are the rip-offs of Aqua, Expose, Widgets, and Spotlight respectively.


Ya right.

Aqua was not GPU accelerated since MacOS X 10.2 Jaguar, that too to some extent only. Aqua still isn't completely GPU accelerated. They still haven't implemented QuartzGL which they said they will in Panther. The Windows in MacOS X which are drawn parallel to Monitor screen were supposed to be treated & rendered as Textures but still they are CPU based rectangles & squares

Vista had full GPU accelerated Window manager since; umm....longhorn 3xxx builds in 2003. The ones with plex Window manager theme.

Widgets of MacOS X are another rip from Konfabulatar

Flip3D is not expose. Expose makes small thumbnails preview of open windows on desktop while Flip3D presents then diagonally.

Spotlight...ummmm who came with Instant search in longhorn builds in 2003? Microsoft I guess.

Nepcker, it is the other way around. Cupertino started there photocopiers in 2003 itself.



> As an example of where I got confused in Vista, is to figure out my complete system config. And I mean the *detailed* config, not just RAM and the processor I have -- in one place, without third-party software. On a mac, I just click on the apple menu and then to "About this mac" and it's all revealed. How do you do that on Vista?


Right click on your "Computer" Link in start menu & select properties. Done...is it that hard to figure out? You are trying to find out your computer properties right.

2nd, type in start menu "System"



> Well, how do you disable it? I would really like to do it. (Make sure it doesn't involve complex process.)


System properties using the above mentioned method or Winkey+Pause\break -> Advanced system settings-> Startup & recovery section -> uncheck the button. That’s it. You can't have it the Mac way on Windows.



> And yes, people who buy hardware that don't yet have drivers for Vista all don't know "computing in right sense".


Umm...what kind of English is that? 

Did MacOS X had drivers for hardware from 3rd party the day it was released? Did Tiger had new compatible 3rd party drivers available from day 1? I guess it didn't even supported backward compatible drivers due to which Panther drivers install on Tiger.


----------



## shantanu (May 12, 2007)

mediator said:
			
		

> N i never pointed towards u "if u can read and understand simple english". Its for people who talk about preinstalled stuff,preinstalled codecs, have some kind of disability that they can't google and then say linux hasn't got this and that software. Its for people who think they can compare OS1 with OS2 where they have 10 yrs of experience with OS1 and almost null with OS2 and then keep on talking about "common sense" a lot while using windows whereas they act and behave like lamers when using Linux! Its "nonsense" to hiberbnate ur "common sense" while using Linux u know!



even i didnt say anything about codecs , just said that running internet or any thing in linux had to be configured before usage.. if you say no then god knows your chemistry...


> honestly saying i am using original windows xp pro sp2 with all latest drivers & updates but still i have lost count of BSOD.
> 
> but on ubuntu there are no bsod



did you try finding out the cause.. it can be coz of any wrong ( corrupt) application..

@nepcker.. in what way is VISTA's UI confusing..


----------



## mediator (May 12, 2007)

> even i didnt say anything about codecs , just said that running internet or any thing in linux had to be configured before usage.. if you say no then god knows your chemistry...


 I know. Lets see how many say, "I didn't say that". As sherlock homes says "Remove the wrongs and u get the right" 

But internet need not be configured. If u have ethernet, then u have internet up and running. If u don't have a linux distro installed then try knoppix!


----------



## nepcker (May 12, 2007)

> Right click on your "Computer" Link in start menu & select properties. Done...is it that hard to figure out? You are trying to find out your computer properties right.


I only get the RAM and processor details. Where are the *detailed* system specs?



> Umm...what kind of English is that?
> 
> Did MacOS X had drivers for hardware from 3rd party the day it was released? Did Tiger had new compatible 3rd party drivers available from day 1? I guess it didn't even supported backward compatible drivers due to which Panther drivers install on Tiger.


I'm not saying that this is Vista's fault. I just mean to say that Vista does indeed show BSOD. Shantanu had said that BSOD will only be visible to people who can't get "computing in right sense". You buy an incompatible hardware and Vista shows a BSOD -- is it that the user can't get "computing in right sense"?


----------



## i_am_crack (May 12, 2007)

As far as system administerator is concerned (Like me) Hell all the OS has Pro's and Con's..Now don't ask me what are they....?

When to figure what is the system spec..in Windows.. i think you know about system information (msinfo32.exe) right? and yeap we have hell of 3rd party tools too...

Dude.. nepcker you talk like a moron now....Not that i hate Mac...especially the look...But I can't ignore the rich features which M$ always incorporates to its OS...Please stop bugging around saying only bad things...

As i said All the OS has Pro's and con's

my 2 cents..

eBro


----------



## gxsaurav (May 12, 2007)

nepcker said:
			
		

> I only get the RAM and processor details. Where are the *detailed* system specs?



About this mac also shows only CPU & RAM details, along with OS version. Windows has been showing details this way since Windows 98

Just Right click on computer -> Properties. Then click on "windows experience index" number & then "view & print details". Done.




> I'm not saying that this is Vista's fault. I just mean to say that Vista does indeed show BSOD. Shantanu had said that BSOD will only be visible to people who can't get "computing in right sense". You buy an incompatible hardware and Vista shows a BSOD -- is it that the user can't get "computing in right sense"?


If you buy an incompatible hardware it will not result in BSOD. It will just not work & nothing will happen.

If you try installing something which changes the system settigs & files then this means you are tinkering with the system which obviously isn't recomended & will lead to system instability.


----------



## nepcker (May 12, 2007)

> About this mac also shows only CPU & RAM details, along with OS version. Windows has been showing details this way since Windows 98
> 
> Just Right click on computer -> Properties. Then click on "windows experience index" number & then "view & print details". Done.


No, you choose "About This Mac", and click on "More Info". You'll get the detailed specs.



> If you buy an incompatible hardware it will not result in BSOD. It will just not work & nothing will happen.


There was a thread about Vista showing a BSOD due to a graphics card from ATi which didn't have drivers for Vista. So, incompatible hardware *will* result in a BSOD in Windows.


----------



## gxsaurav (May 12, 2007)

> There was a thread about Vista showing a BSOD due to a graphics card from ATi which didn't have drivers for Vista. So, incompatible hardware *will* result in a BSOD in Windows.



Refer me to that thread.

If a graphics card has no drivers in Vista inbuilt, then Vista will start in VGA Mode of 640X480 resolution & from there you can insert the manufacturer CD in CD drive to install drivers or using the newly downloaded driver.

Suppose there is an existing Windows Vista installation & you plug in a new ATI graphics card, then Windows will boot in low quality & colour mode & tell you that there are no drivers. It will then present you to install driver option by which you can install.


----------



## aryayush (May 12, 2007)

nepcker said:
			
		

> I only get the RAM and processor details. Where are the *detailed* system specs?


It is not immediately obvious but you have to go to 'Hardware >> Device Manager', to see all the hardware you have installed in your system. I am talking about Windows XP here. It is done differently in Windows Vista but I don't have the patience to reboot into it just to check it out right now.

Oh, and don't expect even a fraction of the details that System Profiler on a Mac shows you. If you want to see all the software you have installed on your system, you have to go to 'Control Panel >> Add or Remove Programs'. Again, don't expect the lever of detail that System Profiler gives you in one simple window.


----------



## gxsaurav (May 12, 2007)

> It is not immediately obvious but you have to go to 'Hardware >> Device Manager', to see all the hardware you have installed in your system. I am talking about Windows XP here. It is done differently in Windows Vista but I don't have the patience to reboot into it just to check it out right now.



Device manager gives device specific info. In Windows Vista you don't need to go to Device manager at all.

Just Right click on computer -> Properties. Then click on "windows experience index" number & then "view & print details". Done.


----------



## aryayush (May 12, 2007)

In case you haven't noticed, that's four clicks already. And no one in his right mind would think that clicking on "Windows Experience Index" would eventually lead him to the system configuration.

I'm not criticising them. Microsoft does some things well, but designing user interfaces is certainly not their forte.


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 12, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> I'm not criticising them. Microsoft does some things well, but designing user interfaces is certainly not their forte.


 but in mac too , to see system profiler you have to click on GO , then utilities n then system profiler , that's 3 cliks here 

but as many have said wahever may be the problems but Vista IS better than Linux currently as a Desktop OS(although XP is better than Linux too).

plz take note than i'm talking bout a Desktop OS n not in server situation .


----------



## aryayush (May 12, 2007)

Keep System Profiler in the dock. You'll need just one click.  
It is not just about the number of clicks though (but it matters too), it is about user interface design. Which one makes more sense? "Start >> Computer (right click) >> Properties >> Windows Experience Index >> View and Print Details" or "Apple >> About This Mac >> More Info..."? Tell me objectively.

And this is a quote from earlier in this thread:





			
				aryayush said:
			
		

> Windows Vista would be the clear winner for most people and I don't think they would be wrong.


Even I agree that Windows is better than Linux.


----------



## gxsaurav (May 12, 2007)

GX said:
			
		

> Right click on your "Computer" Link in start menu & select properties. Done...is it that hard to figure out? You are trying to find out your computer properties right.
> 
> 2nd, type in start menu "System"



OMG writing "S Y S T E M" is 6 clicks


----------



## nepcker (May 12, 2007)

When I tried typing "system", I was taken to "C:\WINDOWS\system". (This is in XP, haven't tried that in Vista.)

If typing "system" in Vista gives me the detailed specs (like _Apple menu | About this mac | More info..._ gives me), can anyone provide me its screenshot. (I'm too lazy to start Vista right now) I'd like to know what that "system" command really shows.


----------



## aryayush (May 12, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> OMG writing "S Y S T E M" is 6 clicks


Once you know how to do something, it can be done even if it requires two hundred clicks, various key combinations, DOS commands and even a reboot or two. But the thing that is called user interface design means making things obvious and easy for the end users, users who may be using your operating system for the first time.

And BTW, of all the methods thus far, this one was the most difficult. No one in their right mind would think, "oh, I need to know the hardware configuration for my system. Let me search for the word 'system'."


----------



## gxsaurav (May 12, 2007)

> When I tried typing "system", I was taken to "C:\WINDOWS\system". (This is in XP, haven't tried that in Vista.)



 You asked for Vista, didn't you? Comon you are yourself confused for what you require.

*img214.imageshack.us/img214/1486/cropss7.jpg

Click on System.


> I'm too lazy to start Vista right now



There is no remedy to lazyness. Don't worry, Mac users are generally lazy when it comes to doing something on there own.



> Once you know how to do something, it can be done even if it requires two hundred clicks, various key combinations, DOS commands and even a reboot or two. But the thing that is called user interface design means making things obvious and easy for the end users, users who may be using your operating system for the first time.



Winkey + Pause/break

The user wants to know the properties of his "Computer", so obviously he will go to Start menu & Right click on "computer" -> Properties. Done.

Type system

Is it really hard to figure out? (read the reason above)


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 12, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Keep System Profiler in the dock. You'll need just one click.
> It is not just about the number of clicks though (but it matters too), it is about user interface design. Which one makes more sense? "Start >> Computer (right click) >> Properties >> Windows Experience Index >> View and Print Details" or "Apple >> About This Mac >> More Info..."? Tell me objectively.
> 
> And this is a quote from earlier in this thread:Even I agree that Windows is better than Linux.


 well it's actually a 2 sclick procedure , on desktop right-clicke your my computer icon n then click properties , that's it you have ur system info .



			
				shantanu_webmaster said:
			
		

> excuse me.. but as far as i know (correct me if i am wrong) UBUNTU is based on linux isnt it means the same platform which is from years (unix and all) (i dont have much knowledge) so you are saying windows 3.0 why not unix and all.. many things are ready made for ubuntu also.. every distro is made onyl by some enhancements made to the base RAW linux platform.. isnt it...


 my point exactly , When linux was made it didn't evn have to chart out a plan of what it had to make , Linux is described by it's creator as a Unix-Like OS , also many of the GNU utilities used by linux distros were there from much earlier than linux , they were creater during the UNIX era . we can have a very long list of projecs that r an integral part of ny linux distro nowadays n that which were present longs before the linux kernel was even introduced 



			
				freebird said:
			
		

> @ TILL DATE NO BSODS IN XP OR VISTA..   :
> I hoped it was R(red)SOD for Vista,but no suprises!!!


  , mate i till-date haven't ever experienced a BSOD in either XP or Vista . and if u are admant at showing that XP n Vista crash too much then what say that a major part of web-servers r running on Unix n Unix like OSes so how some they get hacked huh ? (plz i'm only asking this to freebird coz i know other users do have better stuff to do than search google for problems in MS software )



			
				mAV3 said:
			
		

> @freebird with respect to ur signature most of windows users dont work for the kgb, cia, raw, al-queda tht we need security the amount of security tht windows provides coupled with some common sense which i guess lacks in OSC and hence they say tht ubuntu came today and vista came in 1990


 ;D , will be interesting to see what freebird will say to the Server hacking question . btw , i DON'T use an antivirus n i haven't been infected by any trojan/worm/virus/etc .



			
				freebird said:
			
		

> ofcourse,emulation exists.CEDEGA can play win games in Linux.crossover office for a majority of win apps and WINE too.


 and waht bygone games does cadega play ? also cadega is emulating windows it's not natively playing games on linux so no pint in telling about it coz it will only shows MS's prowess in gaming market 




			
				mediator said:
			
		

> N i never pointed towards u "if u can read and understand simple english". Its for people who talk about preinstalled stuff,preinstalled codecs, have some kind of disability that they can't google and then say linux hasn't got this and that software. Its for people who think they can compare OS1 with OS2 where they have 10 yrs of experience with OS1 and almost null with OS2 and then keep on talking about "common sense" a lot while using windows  whereas they act and behave like lamers when using Linux! Its "nonsense" to hiberbnate ur "common sense" while using Linux u know!


 Point , but we(windows users) never even started the comparing , it is only the *newly-introduced to linux* users that show this kinda behaviour .(for eg. linux will crush windows , bla bla bla ) . most veteran linux users know where Windows is useful n where linux is n both have their respective niche .



			
				saurabh.sauron said:
			
		

> Ubuntu is the clear winner. i tried vista and it is crap. no antivirus support, a big resource hog, no real improvements over XP and horrendous software compatibility are major irritants.


 *people said the same for XP when it was released* , give Vista some time to streatch it's legs man , let software developers utilize the new API's n services provided n then you won't face software compatibility problem .

heck in linux u mostly can't use the software packages meant for ver1 in as near a version as v1.1 , they mostly have boken compatibility .


----------



## freebird (May 12, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> I'm not criticising them. Microsoft does some things well, but designing user interfaces is certainly not their forte.


 As an avid GNU/Linux user also.I'd anytime admit that M$ are better in designing UI that makes it easier for new computer users too 
infact they are mostly into user friendliness.under the hood,it is woods!


----------



## nepcker (May 12, 2007)

> The user wants to know the properties of his "Computer", so obviously he will go to Start menu & Right click on "computer" -> Properties. Done.


 I just want to figure out the *complete system configuration* of my computer, all in one place, without the use of a 3rd party app, and without much trouble.

Does "properties" of a pc and "complete system configuration" mean the same thing? I don't think so.

So, even if a user thinks the way you think he should, he'll only get the CPU and RAM details. I don't think that the average user will think that the specs are hidden on the "Windows Experience Index".


----------



## aryayush (May 12, 2007)

Yeah, why is it so difficult to admit such a simple, point-of-fact matter?

You think "Windows Experience Index" is the ideal heading for hiding your system configuration! Way to go, usability genius!


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 12, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Yeah, why is it so difficult to admit such a simple, point-of-fact matter?
> 
> You think "Windows Experience Index" is the ideal heading for hiding your system configuration! Way to go, usability genius!


 it's as simlpe as to why mac user's don't admit that the *File Renaming Process* is not remotely obvious n has to be searched-for in the help menu 



			
				freebird said:
			
		

> As an avid GNU/Linux user also.I'd anytime admit that M$ are better in designing UI that makes it easier for new computer users too
> infact they are mostly into user friendliness.under the hood,it is woods!


 hey mate r u trying to dodge the question i just posted to you in my earlier post ?


----------



## infra_red_dude (May 12, 2007)

aren't we discussing abt ubuntu and windows here??? i'm kinda confused.. is this an ubuntu vs. windows thread? or a mac vs. windows thread? or a windows vista help thread??!!!

i see the move by dell to bundle ubuntu preinstalled as a positive sign to spread the word abt linux 



			
				Zeeshan Quireshi said:
			
		

> Point , but we(windows users) never even started the comparing , it is only the *newly-introduced to linux* users that show this kinda behaviour .(for eg. linux will crush windows , bla bla bla ) . most veteran linux users know where Windows is useful n where linux is n both have their respective niche.



well said Zeeshan... very true!


----------



## mediator (May 12, 2007)

> , mate i till-date haven't ever experienced a BSOD in either XP or Vista . and if u are admant at showing that XP n Vista crash too much then what say that a major part of web-servers r running on Unix n Unix like OSes so how some they get hacked huh ? (plz i'm only asking this to freebird coz i know other users do have better stuff to do than search google for problems in MS software )


 I know this is specific to freebird, but just to remind that comparing BSOD to hackings isn't sensible u know! I wud appreciate if u ponder a little bit over this and I think I already elaborated about security/hackings in another thread!




> Point , but we(windows users) never even started the comparing , it is only the newly-introduced to linux users that show this kinda behaviour .(for eg. linux will crush windows , bla bla bla ) . most veteran linux users know where Windows is useful n where linux is n both have their respective niche .


 I understand. But when windows users start talking about Linuxes and show their ignorance and FUD, then also it is equally and very annoying. A few exceptions even start a thread to show that other OS is inferior by all means. I don't bother much about this, but I do try to end the topic like I did here and in some previous debates. Some times I dont pay any attention at all and thats what I request u to do.
If u don't like anybody posting news threads about windows bugs like that "copy problem" one then just ignore it. Why even fight over it? This is no reason to hate a user. But yea, when someone shows FUDS u can just correct him....isn't that simple?



> heck in linux *u mostly* can't use the software packages meant for ver1 in as near a version as v1.1 , they mostly have boken compatibility .


 Shud I consider this as another FUD? U r saying like this a frequent case! 
When installing v1.1, the libraries will also most probably get upgraded. I have rarely encountered an issue like that. So the term "mostly" that u used isn't suited here!


----------



## aryayush (May 12, 2007)

Zeeshan Quireshi said:
			
		

> it's as simlpe as to why mac user's don't admit that the *File Renaming Process* is not remotely obvious n has to be searched-for in the help menu


It is confusing only for existing Windows users who switch to the Mac. Macs have always had a simple single key shortcut for renaming files. Now just because Microsoft decided to change this shortcut because it made more sense to them does not mean that Apple have to change it too. It is not as if renaming files requires you to right click on a file, select mark, then go to the option 'send an email' to rename the file. It is a simple shortcut that happens to be different from the Windows shortcut. And it wasn't Apple who changed the shortcut, it was Microsoft. 

And BTW, why would it require you to seek help? Surely the first thing you'd want to do when you switch to a Mac won't be renaming a file. Whenever you try to open a file from the keyboard for the first time, you'll come to know the shortcut for renaming files. I never had to search any help menu for knowing the shortcut to rename or open files.


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 12, 2007)

mediator said:
			
		

> When installing v1.1, the libraries will also most probably get upgraded. I have rarely encountered an issue like that. So the term "mostly" that u used isn't suited here!


 u didn't get me , i'm saying that when the OS is updated from v1.0 to v1.1 then apps which worked in v1.0 are broken in v1.1 . nyways as i said my quetion was to Freebird who'se the most active OS adman/salesman i've even seen , that's y i specifically asked only freebird to answer the question n not a *rational* being 


			
				aryayush said:
			
		

> It is confusing only for existing Windows users who switch to the Mac. Macs have always had a simple single key shortcut for renaming files.


 actually i rarely use the keyboard , most of my work is done without the keyboard so i didn't press the enter key  . nyways my point wasn't that MS changed the key , my point was that the *"Enter" key most naturally means "Execute"* so it is not obvious at first that enter key will be used to rename a file . my point should be considered rfom the usability point of view . in Unix , Solaris , Linux , or ny ohter OS that i've used , Enter does mean to execute a file n not rename it 
heck *even in the command line , you press enter after typing a command to "execute" it .*


----------



## blackleopard92 (May 12, 2007)

to me, it boils down to useability. i would always spend 1 hr learning an app rather than figuring out how to install it. and vista/XP wins hands down in this department.

and in XP, to view advanced properties. u can goto start>programs>accesories>system tools>system information.
that's one click!!! 

and u can always create desktop shortcut if u want access to it all the time.


----------



## led_shankar (May 12, 2007)

Who says it takes anything over, say, 5 minutes to figure out how to install linux applications?
Read the README + follow the instructions -> jhingalala


----------



## saurabh.sauron (May 12, 2007)

> Who says it takes anything over, say, 5 minutes to figure out how to install linux applications?
> Read the README + follow the instructions -> jhingalala



bingo. read, copy, execute commands and forget about it...


----------



## freebird (May 12, 2007)

Zeeshan Quireshi said:
			
		

> i
> hey mate r u trying to dodge the question i just posted to you in my earlier post ?


GNU/Linux server security is much better as u know(netfilter iptables).Windows* never can have the security that UNIX systems have.take it.*
for ur question on versions!:

*en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Windows_and_Linux#Installation
*en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Windows_and_Linux
Now What I posted was truth only.dont get pwned.I know U r quueing me for some posts.now dear,pls answer me,ur questions says Linux doesnot have this,that....Honestly say-Did u ever tried reading what FOSS really is?
If u dont i have a humble suggestion-leave Linux,enjoy with Vista.
STOP THE FUD
Dont listen to the fanatic window users,just think about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------
To someone else's note:I am a GNU/Linux user for 4 yrs.does it make me count Linux Newbie?
I am enjoying the freedom it gives.@Zeeshan kid cant particularly digest this.I am not gonna change my avatar any soon 
I tries my best to solve problems posted in Open SOurce section.


----------



## led_shankar (May 12, 2007)

I'd also like to mention that people who berate software/OS choices of others are juvenile, idiotic and -most importantly- DISRESPECTFUL to the whole developer community. Shame on you all.


----------



## gxsaurav (May 12, 2007)

led_shankar said:
			
		

> I'd also like to mention that people who berate software/OS choices of others are juvenile, idiotic and -most importantly- DISRESPECTFUL to the whole developer community. Shame on you all.



Right said, use whatever you want. Just don't rant about your products neing the best cos it is not without its flaws. 

Good night.


----------



## nepcker (May 13, 2007)

*@Zeeshan Quireshi:*


> it's as _simple_ as to why mac user's don't admit that the *File Renaming Process* is not remotely obvious n has to be searched-for in the help menu


 You seem to have forgotten that I did say that the rename process was a little less obvious. I find it quite intuitive, but since Windows users are accustomed to _Right Click | Rename_, it will be a little more trouble to native Windows users.

And since you have previously (somewhat indirectly, maybe you were joking) been saying that user-friendliness is directly proportional to no. of clicks, less no. of steps is required on a mac. 

On Windows, you click on the file, then you right click on the file, then you select "Rename". On Mac OS X, you just select the file and hit Return (or Enter, if you're not using a mac keyboard).

* @blackleopard92:*


> to me, it boils down to _usability_. i would always spend 1 hr learning an app rather than figuring out how to install it. and vista/XP wins hands down in this department.
> 
> and in XP, to view advanced properties. u can goto start>programs>accesories>system tools>system information.
> that's *one click*!!!
> ...


 LOL! The first click is on the Start, and the next is on "system information". How is that just one click? Besides, you cannot just say that Windows is more usable simply because of less no. of clicks required. The thing that counts is no. of *steps*, not clicks. If no. of clicks were of more concern, then installing apps on Linux doesn't require many clicks. You just need to type the command and press enter/return, but that doesn't count as a click, does it?

And oh, as an added info for you, on Mac OS X, to install most apps, you don't even need to go through the boring _Next | Next | Next_ loops, neither do you have to type some long list of commands. You just drag the app to the Applications folder, and it's now ready to use!

* @gx_saurav:*


> Right said, use whatever you want. Just don't rant about your products _being_ the best cos it is not without its flaws..


 Who said to you that *any* OS is perfect? All OSes has its own sets of pros and cons, it's just that some have more pros than others.

You can't even accept that "Windows Experience Index" is not an obvious place to hide the system specs!


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 13, 2007)

gx_saurav said:
			
		

> use whatever you want. Just don't rant about your products neing the best cos it is not without its flaws.


 whoa , after a long time  



			
				nepcker said:
			
		

> On Windows, you click on the file, then you right click on the file, then you select "Rename". On Mac OS X, you just select the file and hit 'return'.


 that's my point , Enter on major OS'es and in general means Execute , whereas in Mac it means rename , is this what you call usability ?



			
				freebird said:
			
		

> Did u ever tried reading what FOSS really is?


 well mate i haev read a lot of the history of Unix n Linux n what inspirations went into making GNUn FSF that's y i meant to say that every OS has flaws but you just seem to say that *Linux is Perfect n Vista is crap* , it is to this notion that i was urged to post in this Thread .


----------



## infra_red_dude (May 13, 2007)

mediator said:
			
		

> when someone shows FUDS u can just correct him....isn't that simple?



the most sensible thing to do. rightly said!



			
				aryayush said:
			
		

> It is confusing only for existing Windows users who switch to the Mac.



exactly! everyone is comfortable in the OS they use. so when someone wants to try out or use a diff OS, then the person must be ready to learn something. u can't expect everything to be catered to what u had prev. 

lets consider this, the cbZ has a 1 down, 4 up gear shift while the pulsars (til recently) had all down gear shifts. now when somebody says that i recently shifted from cbz to pulsar and i can't shift gears. this bike is ****! won't that sound absurd??!!! same is the case whether a linux user used windows or vice versa (mac included too!) 

if u expect something from the OS then the OS also expects something from u. u needn't master it to just try or use it. but u shud at least bother to learn basic usability.



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Use whatever you want. Just don't rant about your products neing the best cos it is not without its flaws.



very correct. be it linux, mac or windows every OS has some flaws....

btw, i installed freespire and this was the linux distro closest to windows, played wmv,mp3,qt almost all media files out of the box. interface was similar to windows and if u consider the polishing, then i must say acc. to me this is the "most polished" distro. new migrants who complain of linux being complex shud try this distro first, familiarize themselves wid linux and then move on to more unix like distros like ubuntu.


----------



## freebird (May 13, 2007)

^^even catb fame ESR is now supporting freespire


----------



## gxsaurav (May 13, 2007)

nepcker said:
			
		

> On Windows, you click on the file, then you right click on the file, then you select "Rename". On Mac OS X, you just select the file and hit Return (or Enter, if you're not using a mac keyboard).



You never used Windows, did U? , How about pressing F2



> And oh, as an added info for you, on Mac OS X, to install most apps, you don't even need to go through the boring _Next | Next | Next_ loops, neither do you have to type some long list of commands. You just drag the app to the Applications folder, and it's now ready to use!



umm,,,not exectly. You need to read the EULA then wait for the dmg to decompress then copy & things on max are precompiled binary which results in higher file size.



> You can't even accept that "Windows Experience Index" is not an obvious place to hide the system specs!



What does those number signify Nepcker . It is also not obvious that you will find System info in a menubar....reserved at the top for alimighty Apple.


----------



## Kiran.dks (May 13, 2007)

nepcker said:
			
		

> On Windows, you click on the file, then you right click on the file, then you select "Rename". On Mac OS X, you just select the file and hit Return (or Enter, if you're not using a mac keyboard).



Now that clearly says how noob you are to Windows. I wonder how are you able to comment such big anti Windows quotes without knowing about it. Just stop the rubbish and stick to a Mac. 



			
				nepcker said:
			
		

> LOL! The first click is on the Start, and the next is on "system information". How is that just one click? Besides, you cannot just say that Windows is more usable simply because of less no. of clicks required. The thing that counts is no. of *steps*, not clicks. If no. of clicks were of more concern, then installing apps on Linux doesn't require many clicks. You just need to type the command and press enter/return, but that doesn't count as a click, does it?



First learn to create shortcuts in Windows if you are using one.



			
				nepcker said:
			
		

> And oh, as an added info for you, on Mac OS X, to install most apps, you don't even need to go through the boring _Next | Next | Next_ loops, neither do you have to type some long list of commands. You just drag the app to the Applications folder, and it's now ready to use!



There is something 'sensible' info given for click of 'Next'. Learn to read.



			
				nepcker said:
			
		

> Who said to you that *any* OS is perfect? All OSes has its own sets of pros and cons, it's just that some have more pros than others.



Point noted!


----------



## nepcker (May 13, 2007)

*@gx_saurav:*


> You never used Windows, did U? , How about pressing F2


 Yes, pressing F2 does the job, but it, too, isn't obvious for a rename job.



> umm,,,not exectly. You need to read the EULA then wait for the dmg to decompress then copy & things on max are precompiled binary which results in higher file size.


 That's for *downloaded* applications. DMGs are disk images, not installers. This is like a virtual hard drive or a virtual CD, and is a convenient way to place a number of related files together for installation.

For softwares that come in CD/DVD, I just insert the disc into my Mac -- and a Finder window will open showing the contents of the disc. Usually, all I'll need to to do is drag a folder from the disc’s window to the desired final location on my hard drive -- typically the Applications folder. (Most commercial software will have some form of Read Me file or simple instructions visible in the disc’s window, so you can follow that if you get confused somewhere.)



> It is also not obvious that you will find System info in a menubar....reserved at the top for alimighty Apple.


 Okay, Mr. Usabilty Guru, can you please tell me its ideal location -- the ideal location for all the OSes to show the system config.

*@Kiran_tech_mania:*


> Now that clearly says how noob you are to Windows. I wonder how are you able to comment such big anti Windows quotes without knowing about it.


 Yes, F2 works, and I use it whenever I use Windows. But is mentioning the steps involved for renaming a file in Windows my "anti Windows" comments? I just said that renaming is no harder on Mac OS X than it is on Windows. That was my point.



> There is something 'sensible' info given for click of 'Next'. Learn to read.


 Yes, some things are sensible, but not all.

"This will install _XXX_ on your computer." Like I didn't know what I was about to install!


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 13, 2007)

nepcker said:
			
		

> "This will install _XXX_ on your computer." Like I didn't know what I was about to install!


 as far as i remember , when i nstalled DivX on mac i had to click on next , 4 times and also had to click on "I Agree" before clicking next 

PS: that too was before mounting the "dmg" , that's 1 click more .


----------



## Kiran.dks (May 13, 2007)

nepcker said:
			
		

> Yes, F2 works, and I use it whenever I use Windows.



Inspite of knowing that F2 works, you managed to write a long one for Windows. Isn't it?..._(Observe the bolded ones!)_


> " On Windows, you *click *on the file, *then *you right click on the file, *then *you *select *"Rename". On Mac OS X, you *just select *the file and *hit* Return (or Enter, if you're not using a mac keyboard).



How about this...

"On Windows, you *click* on the file, and just *press* F2 to rename! "



			
				nepcker said:
			
		

> But is mentioning the steps involved for renaming a file in Windows my "anti Windows" comments? I just said that renaming is no harder on Mac OS X than it is on Windows. That was my point.



My quote was for most of the posts in this thread, not just for renaming.


> Yes, some things are sensible, but not all.
> 
> "This will install XXX on your computer." Like I didn't know what I was about to install!



Your points are really very dumb. An exe file name will never give full info about what you are installing. Hence there is a need to shown the FULL PROGRAM name and VERSION prior to installing. This is essential.


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 13, 2007)

also Nepcker doesn't seem to know that in windows you don't hv to click a file n then right click it , you can simply right-click it n select rename 

that's 2 clicks not three .

also this means that Mac is not usable completely without the Keyboard , in Windows i can do almost all my tasks without using the Keyboard .

honestly , nepcker have u even used windows for a single day , doesn't seem so .


----------



## infra_red_dude (May 13, 2007)

Zeeshan Quireshi said:
			
		

> in Windows i can do almost all my tasks without using the Keyboard



and many times, its the fastest way too! commendable job ms has done by providing keyboard shortcuts to almost everything!


----------



## aryayush (May 13, 2007)

He said that he could do anything _without_ using a keyboard. I think you misunderstood him. 



			
				Zeeshan Quireshi said:
			
		

> also this means that Mac is not usable completely without the Keyboard , in Windows i can do almost all my tasks without using the Keyboard .
> 
> honestly , nepcker have u even used windows for a single day , doesn't seem so .


Click on any file and then click again on its name. You can then rename it. I am sure you'll need to use the keyboard even on Windows for typing out the name. 

There is nothing on Mac OS X that cannot be done without a keyboard.

As for the DivX thing, there will always be some software that need to modify some system wide settings and therefore require an installer but it is true indeed that most software on Mac OS X work without any installation and can directly be run from anywhere. The biggest advantage is that you do not need to preserve downloaded installers in case you need to re-install any application or move to a new Mac.


----------



## infra_red_dude (May 13, 2007)

^^^ woopsie! my bad!


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 13, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> Click on any file and then click again on its name. You can then rename it. I am sure you'll need to use the keyboard even on Windows for typing out the name.


 this behaviour is in Windows Too


----------



## Kiran.dks (May 13, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> He said that he could do anything _without_ using a keyboard. I think you misunderstood him.
> 
> Click on any file and then click again on its name. You can then rename it. I am sure you'll need to use the keyboard even on Windows for typing out the name.



Yes, most of us do this way.
We are also trying to explain that Windows Users also can do the same thing instead of that long _then,then.._ method said by nepcker. I said him the best equivalent of what nepcker does in Mac by replacing "Return" key with "F2". 

Now lets stop this silly thing and stay on topic. Ubuntu & Vista.


----------



## gxsaurav (May 13, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> The biggest advantage is that you do not need to preserve downloaded installers in case you need to re-install any application or move to a new Mac.



Lolz....arya, you really do not know anything about MacOS X too.

dmg are installers, they are self mountable disk images, more like zip file. Under this zip file there is a structure of files correspondign to the folders of MacOS X system like

\etc\
\var\abc.bin

When u install a DMG it extracts a file & copies to the main System folder ~\ so now u have the DMG installer & extracted files. 2 Copies


----------



## aryayush (May 13, 2007)

Zeeshan Quireshi said:
			
		

> this behaviour is in Windows Too


I know. I was just telling you that you can easily rename files just with the help of the mouse, which you thought wasn't possible. 



			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Lolz....arya, you really do not know anything about MacOS X too.
> 
> dmg are installers, they are self mountable disk images, more like zip file. Under this zip file there is a structure of files correspondign to the folders of MacOS X system like
> 
> ...


Idiot!

DMG's are disk images, like ISOs. Mac OS X natively supports mounting disk images. So, for example, if you have an ISO image of a disk, you needn't burn it onto a DVD to use it. You simply double click on the file and it will be mounted like a DVD, read to use. DMGs are a little different from ISOs because they support encryption, validation and authentication. So the author can require a password for accessing the contents of the DMG and/or require that an EULA be agreed to. DMGs also retain any formatting you do to its contents and background.

*But they are not installers in any way, shape or form.* Opening a DMG file will never start a software installation. Never ever. It will only display the contents within. If it contains an installer, you open it and do it the Windows way. If it contains the application directly (and this is the far more common scenario), you can either choose to run the software directly from the disk image or you can copy it to your hard drive. Once you've copied it, you can dispense with the disk image. It is no use.

If you want to move that application to another folder, you can do it. If you want to give it to a friend, just give him the application and he can copy/paste it on his Mac and run it. Most applications work like this and require no installers. Now, please learn to STFU when you have no clue what you are talking about, as is the case more times than I would have preferred.


----------



## gxsaurav (May 13, 2007)

Ever tried opening a dmg file using Zip or Stuffit?

They contain the installer, they first mount & from there your install. Yes. But you cannot mount a DMG directly in MacOS Filesystem as LiveFS



			
				KTM said:
			
		

> Now lets stop this silly thing and stay on topic. Ubuntu & Vista.


----------



## aryayush (May 13, 2007)

First statement:





			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> Lolz....arya, you really do not know anything about MacOS X too.
> 
> dmg are installers



Next one:





			
				gx_saurav said:
			
		

> They contain the installer, they first mount & from there your install. Yes.



I'm surprised you even manage to spell your name properly!


----------



## gxsaurav (May 13, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> I'm surprised you even manage to spell your name properly!



My bad, how can I defy the Mac genius


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 13, 2007)

Well i know DMG files r disk images but i think they can be configured to autorun just like CD's r made to autorun . coz when i double clicked on DivX DMG it mountes it n then the installer started automatically


----------



## nepcker (May 13, 2007)

> honestly , nepcker have u even used windows for a single day , doesn't seem so .


 I've been using Windows for about eight years, and my mac experience is only about five years.


----------



## gxsaurav (May 13, 2007)

^^^^

Ya ya, we just found out how much you & arya knows about Windows from some of your recent posts.


----------



## aryayush (May 13, 2007)

Zeeshan Quireshi said:
			
		

> Well i know DMG files r disk images but i think they can be configured to autorun just like CD's r made to autorun . coz when i double clicked on DivX DMG it mountes it n then the installer started automatically


I don't think so. If you use Safari for downloading the disk image, it automatically mounts the disk image after disk image and if it has an installer, Safari launches it and if it has an application, Safari extracts the application and deleted the DMG.

In any case, a disk image that runs automatically is hardly the same thing as an installer.


----------



## praka123 (May 13, 2007)

I suggests  Ubuntu as the better OS.although it will be nice if they by default uses the blubuntu(blue) theme instead of human theme.


----------



## gxsaurav (May 14, 2007)

aryayush said:
			
		

> *Safari extracts the application and deleted the DMG.*
> 
> In any case, a disk image that runs automatically is hardly the same thing as an installer.



What the...then how will I install again sometime? I will need to redownload the DMG.

Oh & behold another user of MacOS X on thsi forum, mav3


----------



## aryayush (May 14, 2007)

Aargh! I would like to quote Draco Malfoy here:
_"Honestly, if you were any slower, you'd be walking backwards."_

1. Most applications on Mac OS X do not require an installer. There is nothing like installing an application. Think of a DMG as a CD full of Word documents. Why do you need the CD once you have copied the documents onto your hard drive?
Similarly, you can do away with the DMG file once you have _copied_ the application onto your hard drive. If you need it somewhere else, move it there. You don't need to uninstall and re-install it like on Windows. You can even make several copies of the application and store it at five different places in the operating system or even in the same place (with different names, of course).

2. You can turn the feature off in the Safari preferences so that it will just download the files and leave them untouched.

3. Since it deletes the file and it ends up in the Trash, you can always retrieve it from there.


----------



## gxsaurav (May 14, 2007)

Hmm..this thread is not about Mac, sorry I almost hijacked it.


----------



## aryayush (May 14, 2007)

See. Right here. Right now.

Absolutely obvious proof that gx_saurav is a Mac hater (he claims to be a Macboy hater or whatever). He keeps ranting on and on about how bad they are and when he is comprehensively owned, he will never _ever_ give credit where it is due. Just an offhand comment but no acknowledgment of the fact that it is a good feature.

It would have been no problem if no one cared for your opinion (like me), but unfortunately, some people do. Hopefully some people will use some logic and common sense when they come across such posts.


----------



## gxsaurav (May 14, 2007)

^^^^ yup

If u wanna get banned for making technology section fight club then do as u wish. Weekend is over so i m back to work


----------



## prasad_den (May 14, 2007)

^^ Ya.. If ever someone needs to be banned, its both the mac genius and the mac hater.. I don't know why you guys keep bickering about your fav OSes in every thread possible..!! And honestly, neither of you can claim to be innocent. Both are equally responsible for hijacking threads with mac love vs hate..!


----------



## mediator (May 14, 2007)

Some wise guy said, "Those who fight a lot on the stage are best friends behind the curtains".


----------



## aryayush (May 14, 2007)

That wise guy was a big fool indeed. 



			
				prasad_den said:
			
		

> ^^ Ya.. If ever someone needs to be banned, its both the mac genius and the mac hater.. I don't know why you guys keep bickering about your fav OSes in every thread possible..!! And honestly, neither of you can claim to be innocent. Both are equally responsible for hijacking threads with mac love vs hate..!


It really isn't for you to decide who needs to be banned and who not, so just mind you own business please!


----------



## prasad_den (May 15, 2007)

Yeah.. and that's what I'm just doing..!! Minding my own business... Take no offence mate..!


----------



## blueshift (May 15, 2007)

Can anyone tell if Ubuntu7.04 CD is available in any of the mags? 

I also ordered Ubuntu CD for free from their site...but how much will be the shipping costs in mumbai?


----------



## prasad_den (May 15, 2007)

No shipping charges if ordered from shipit site... Best way is to download the iso, if it is possible. So far no magazine has given the 7.04 version, to my knowledge..


----------



## shantanu (May 15, 2007)

i ordered the 64 bit cd and i got it in 15 days... its a very nice Distro..


----------



## blueshift (May 15, 2007)

I dont have a broadband net. 
yes i ordered it from shipit site.
 i ordered a 1 cd pack. what does a 3 cd pack contain? extra softwares?
but i have doubt whether it will install on my system. i tried to install suse, fedora3 and others but they just hanged during the setup. i had just redhat7 installed
 sucessfully among the linux distros. Is this be due to hardware compatibility?
my sys is amd2400+ and mb is A7n-vm


----------



## Kiran.dks (May 15, 2007)

blueshift said:
			
		

> I dont have a broadband net.
> yes i ordered it from shipit site.
> i ordered a 1 cd pack. what does a 3 cd pack contain? extra softwares?
> but i have doubt whether it will install on my system. i tried to install suse, fedora3 and others but they just hanged during the setup. i had just redhat7 installed
> ...



Ubuntu is good. Give a try. I faced no problems installing it. But onething, after installation, you should connect online and download loads of stuff to keep it working for your needs.


----------



## Digit_Dragon (May 15, 2007)

But I feel Linux has still to develop to reach Windows in many ways..
As Kiran Tech says...we have to get other tools and accessories from net.
If a person is not having net connection then???

Windows is perfectly packaged with all the basic needs in one single hassle free installation.


----------



## blueshift (May 15, 2007)

ofcourse I want to try this distro...i guess i must have ordered the 3CD pack.
Now i cant even cancel the request.


> 1 CDs requested on 2007-05-13. 1 CDs were approved and sent to the shipping company 11 hours ago.



Shall i reorder the 3 CD pack or they wont ship again?


----------



## mediator (May 15, 2007)

> But I feel Linux has still to develop to reach Windows in many ways..
> As Kiran Tech says...we have to get other tools and accessories from net.
> If a person is not having net connection then???
> 
> Windows is perfectly packaged with all the basic needs in one single hassle free installation.


 winzip,winrar,anti-virus,MS-office,vb/.net librares,drivers,codecs (mp3 support?), java runtime, yahoo messenger etc......these r basic needs. For a programmer => add programming languages like c++,java,perl etc! All bundled and perfectly packaged?  .....news!


----------



## blueshift (May 15, 2007)

Digit_Dragon said:
			
		

> But I feel Linux has still to develop to reach Windows in many ways..
> As Kiran Tech says...we have to get other tools and accessories from net.
> If a person is not having net connection then???



I think they are already providing softwares on those extra cd's. 
You shouldn't complain when its free. 



> ofcourse I want to try this distro...i guess i must have ordered the 3CD pack.
> Now i cant even cancel the request.
> 
> Quote:
> ...


----------



## Digit_Dragon (May 15, 2007)

Whatever may be, according to me installation of any software, in windows is simple and easy.

It is not the case with Linux...one of my friend just installed Ubuntu and when he  inserted a CD his My computer doesn't show the CD drive what to say then....


----------



## blueshift (May 15, 2007)

How many CDs can I order from the Shipit site for the same address?
Please help


----------



## mediator (May 15, 2007)

Why dont u download it?


----------



## blueshift (May 15, 2007)

I dont have broadband yaar.


----------



## Third Eye (May 15, 2007)

blueshift said:
			
		

> How many CDs can I order from the Shipit site for the same address?
> Please help



Three

They will consider special requests if you are a teacher giving CDs to         your students, or if you are distributing CDs at a conference or other         organized event.


----------



## prasad_den (May 15, 2007)

And a 3 CD pack has nothing but 3 CDs of Ubuntu 7.04 which you can share with friends.. No extra softwares..



			
				Digit_Dragon said:
			
		

> Whatever may be, according to me installation of any software, in windows is simple and easy.
> 
> It is not the case with Linux...one of my friend just installed Ubuntu and when he  inserted a CD his My computer doesn't show the CD drive what to say then....


I don't know what prob your friend is facing, but according to me Ubuntu 7.04 has been excellent in terms of usability. Once I installed it and all its updates I am able to read and write all windows partitions also. Interface is good, and I feel its the perfect flavour for windows users who would like to try/shift to linux...


----------



## amitava82 (May 15, 2007)

We really should not waste their resources just by ordering unnecessary extra copy of cds... U know some companies charges even for Beta CD/DVDs? just download if possible or get it copied from some friends or u can ask in open source section.. If all fails then order a copy then you can make  copies for your friends 

BTW i don't think his friend is facing any problem, he just missed the CD icon on the Desktop. Remember "Linux is not windows, So don't expect to use it like windows".


----------



## ITTechPerson (May 15, 2007)

@blueshift ..... from which site u ordered the cd ? pls update us, also make a comment about the time gap of reciving the cd.


----------



## mediator (May 15, 2007)

amitava82 said:
			
		

> BTW i don't think his friend is facing any problem, he just missed the CD icon on the Desktop. Remember "Linux is not windows, So don't expect to use it like windows".


Why do u even need to reply man, he already made a lasting impression with  his statement!


> Windows is *perfectly packaged with all the basic needs in one single hassle free installation.*


 But he missed that basic needs like office,messenger etc are there in linux distros! And now he wants others to believe cdrom wasn't detected? 
U can guess about the person's experience and attitude if he is biased or not from such statements!


----------



## amitava82 (May 15, 2007)

Well.. My laptop is useless crap with default installation of Windows  until i install all the drivers. My Wifi (most important for me) does not work, no WLAN, Sound, Graphics acceleration, Bluetooth, in built Card reader - none of them work until i install drivers. Thats quite hassle free installation for me.


----------



## infra_red_dude (May 15, 2007)

Digit_Dragon said:
			
		

> Windows is perfectly packaged with all the basic needs in one single hassle free installation.



as i'd said in one of the other threads, try sabayon/freespire/dreamlinux before jumping into a more "unix"ish distro like ubuntu. i'm sure u'll haf nothing to complain.

if u are one of those who knows absolutely nothing but windows then freespire will help u migrate to linux. if u believe ur computing skills are intermediate try dreamlinux. if u believe in getting everything out of the box and think ur skills lie between intermediate and advanced and are ready to learn new things try sabayon.

but if u are of the adventerous kind and love trying out new software and ready to learn things jump into ubuntu directly!


----------



## Digit_Dragon (May 16, 2007)

Thanks for the info infrared dude


----------



## gxsaurav (May 16, 2007)

Hey, is ordering for an Ubuntu DVD Free? I m downloading freeespire these days.


----------



## infra_red_dude (May 16, 2007)

^^^ nope it is not. u'll hafta purchase ubuntu dvd, if u want it shipped or u can download it for free.

u can download it from here:
*nginyang.uvt.nl/feisty/


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 16, 2007)

infra_red_dude said:
			
		

> ^^^ nope it is not. u'll hafta purchase ubuntu dvd, if u want it shipped or u can download it for free.
> 
> u can download it from here:
> *nginyang.uvt.nl/feisty/


 well i downloaded freespire bout 6months back but the installer stuck at the first phase


----------



## infra_red_dude (May 16, 2007)

hmmm... yeah it mite've quirks. thats version 1.0. there've been some changes. its now ver.1.0.13. u may try it out. or u may the ver.2.0 alpha.

ver.1.0.13 ran fine on vmware in windows xp for me.


----------



## kalpik (May 16, 2007)

I'd suggest Sabayon as the first distro for people new to linux to try.. Most of the people here would not be able to help if you run freespire as hardly anyone uses/has used freespire..


----------



## led_shankar (May 16, 2007)

I once made a random suggestion to a friend to use Sabayon, (by her own admission she had a hard  time even working through windows). Well, she set it up herself (no help/tips etc. needed) and she switched to it, from vista


----------



## Zeeshan Quireshi (May 16, 2007)

it's not that i'm New to Linux , i currently have Kubuntu , along with XP n OSX n am triple booting very happily 

i have all Codecs n multimedia things set up on Kubuntu , but it's always good to try a new Distro(coz now i have the disk space to do so)


----------



## blueshift (Jun 11, 2007)

ITTechPerson said:
			
		

> @blueshift ..... from which site u ordered the cd ? pls update us, also make a comment about the time gap of reciving the cd.



Wo...finally I received the Ubuntu CD on Saturday 9 of this month. Its in perfect condition. No money was charged.
I will install it once I clean my system.


----------



## sabret00the (Jun 11, 2007)

today recieved 2 cds of the CDs of the latest version ubuntu (7.04) Feisty Fawn - one is a 64bit and another is a 32bit PC Edition.


----------

