Desktop Linux For The Windows Power User

[Guest]

I think someone nailed it with the why ubuntu and why not fedora and SUSE comment.

It's been about 2 years since I last used *buntu and it still looks as n00by as before. Ubuntu (or rather Canonical) was a good launch point earlier but not any longer. These days, it's just cresting the wave created by the marketing department and the ShipIt service.

These days, I recommend new Linuxers to start with a better and more polished distro like Mandriva and Fedora. Debian and SUSE are in too much muck IMO. I think a good roadmap for a Linuxer is: Mandriva/Fedora -> Arch/Gentoo/LFS.

Another thing, recommending Gnome to someone coming from Windows doesn't really look like a good suggestion. I know it can be customized to a great degree but KDE is always the recommended jump point for someone who might have spent all their life using the 95/98/XP/Vista menu.

 

[Guest]

The problem with Linux and such is that people would rather preach a philosophy than actually just develop an OS and listen to the majority of its users, but this is an outsider viewpoint since I've not touched the thing since Mandrake 7.2... Although coming from a software developer's standpoint I might consider installing SUSE...

 

[skykaptain]

I use Ubuntu 9.04 and Xandros on my Eee pc and both work great, Ubuntu is better though. I know Xandros is the default OS but I haven't deleted it because I know it will work if something happens to Ubuntu. I would use Linux 24/7 if games worked on it and if the software I use for school worked in it too. For games I still have XP and Vista. Vista's not bad if you didn't have any expectations for it and if you got it free. Going to a tech school has its perks.

 

[randomizer]

[citation][nom]ap90033[/nom]I use Vista as primary but currently have Fedora 11 Beta to play with. Looks slick but 3d Doesnt work and everyone says its ATI's fault (supposedly my kernel it to new). Its stuff like that that I hate. I think Loki was the perfect idea, just at the wrong time. We NEED a NEW LOKI!!!!!!http://www.lokigames.com/[/citation]
What do you mean 3D doesn't work? Be specific about your problem and people can help you solve it (although I won't because I probably don't have a clue how). ATI's drivers are definitely a problem, but may not be the problem. NVIDIA has much better Linux drivers, that is a well known fact. AMD talks up their push for open source support but doesn't deliver.

 

[Guest]

I can recommend that once you have a working desktop go to http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu:Jaunty
which has instructions for just about anything you can imagine.

 

[descendency]

For those of you who are not sure, you only need one program to decide: http://www.virtualbox.org/

Keep in mind, not everything works perfectly, but if you are a power office user, programmer, or something, a VM is a great way to get an idea of how the OS works.

 

[chaohsiangchen]

Ubuntu changed too many old Linuxer habits. They either put scripts in different filenames, or have different directories for files and links. In addition, old things such as vim, g++, emacs, latex, make and some other stuff aren't installed by default. I like my Linux boots into fail-safe text mode then I startx & after logging in. Any Linuxers know the old days when XWindow system wasn't very stable (especially the Chinese version), so there's need to ssh and kill it.

My opinion is that people who are too stupid to learn bash, tcsh, awk, sed, vim, emacs, latex and C Programming Language are obliged to pay M$ or Apple tax. Leave my twm and xterm alone!

 

[ap90033]

[citation][nom]grege[/nom]I can recommend that once you have a working desktop go to http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu:Jauntywhich has instructions for just about anything you can imagine.[/citation]
I have posted this in Rage 3d forums, Fedora Forums, and Ubuntu Forums.
ATI Driver 9.4
My Card Asus 4870X2
Display 1080P LCD TV
Install linux
Install Drivers
reboot
Get garbled mess or screen that is mostly white with lines. If you can help you would be the coolest dude on the planet!

 

[tlbj6142]

One big reason why Linux of any flavor doesn't take off as a desktop platform is because there are 8 million Linux distros and what appears to be constant civil wars between distro developers. If the whole Linux community would stand behind a single distro, you'd see more 3rd party support (drivers, games, etc.) I understand many of this distros are compatible with each other, but from an uninformed user's PoV they all appear to be different OS platforms. If the end users are confused not focused and don't know which distro to use, the 3rd party devs have no reason to focus on the platform.

 

[ap90033]

Computer World has a good article on this. "Desktop Linux: Why you shouldnt care"
"Linux has been around since 1991 --- a full 18 years --- and is available for free. Given that, the recent "milestone" of 1% market share doesnt seem that impressive."

 

[tipoo]

Can you change the boot-up to automaticaly boot into windows instead? And can you change the time delay? Dont want to confuse the folks, you see ;-)

 

[Niva]

Adobe Flash player 10 works fine under 64 bit linux. There's been absolutely no reason I'm aware of to stick to the 32 bit editions if you can run x64.

I personally dual boot on all my machines, if for no other reason but to make sure the system is still operational even if windows gets pwned by a root kit. Gaming and certain applications are a hassle though, however, for many things like music and internet browsing and office work linux is a charm. I'm surprised businesses don't run it more and save up some money they donate to MS.

Cheers!

 

[heltoupee]

[citation][nom]mitch074[/nom]Good! Er, well, not perfect, but good.Linux (the kernel) has built-in 32-bit compatibility when running in 64-bit: I mean, you could perfectly run the rest of the system (including the GUI) in 32-bit, or actually have both:[/citation]

Yes, well, in a perfect world. Just wait until you're running along nicely in your x64 Ubuntu distro, and all of a sudden want to use something that's only distributed in 32bit variety. It's going to link to a thousand and one external libraries that I'll bet didn't get installed with the system. Oh they did? But they're the 64bit versions? Too bad, 64bit libraries are not the same as their 32bit counterparts, and software that links against one will not function with the other. So you've got some dependency-hell to trudge through finding the 32bit versions, and symlinking them in the right places. And God help you if you're trying to compile or install something that wasn't packaged to function on a 64bit machine with 32bit compatibility libraries.

I've been running Ubuntu 64bit since 7.04 and wish that I'd just gone for the 32bit flavor (almost did before Flash 10 came out in a 64bit binary).

At the end of the day, Windows costs money, and Linux is free. Free like a puppy is free. Sure, it didn't cost you anything, but before it's going to work for you, you have to train it, give it shots, buy it a leash, etc. So, what you save in the initial outlay will be made up for later in time spent.

 

[ram1009]

The author refers to himself as an "ex gamer". I can't help wondering how that catagory qualifies him to write this article on this forum.

 

[Guest]

@the people talking about "out of memory" type errors in WINE: Logging in as root to run WINE usually fixes this, it's an anti-hax0ring feature.

Otherwise, I'm glad to see these kind of articles, props to the author...

 

[enterco]

@Adam Overa: "Writing for power users, I assume that you have a good working knowledge of Windows and computers in general, but little or no experience with Linux."
You assume that the 'power users' concept is strictly related to 'Windows'. You're wrong!

@Adam Overa: "Think of / as the Linux equivalent of c:\, which is the default location for all Windows files and directories."
If / is equivalent to C:\, what should be equivalent to D:\ ? "/" is the root, and I don't see a similar concept in windows.

@ap90033: "lame Linux gurus who scream Linux isnt Windows dont compare it to that and dont listen (LISTEN hello?) to what people are wanting in an OS... Microsoft listened (at least a little), and I think a couple of people use their software... lol"
Considering the money paid to ms-compatible software, probably the software you get is acceptable. That rule applies to linux too.

@ap90033: "I know it isnt all Linux fault, but lets be honest, getting Linux working can be such a pain (BOY DO I KNOW) and windows is so much easier."
Everyone stops trying at some point. Not anyone can handle it. Sure, windows it's easier, many people preffer to pay some bucks and get some attention from the software vendor if they need it, or at least to find easily the answers. Again, the rule applies to linux too (paid distros, like Redhat or SuSE, of course).

@randomizer: Most of the time it is the software developers just not porting their programs to Linux, or in the case of many drivers, not developing them as open source.
The software developers are paid to do what their managers tell them to do. There are many managers which don't 'waste' resources for a ROI which they don't see. But, the rule applies even in windows-only world: even if the hardware cam do something, you won't get software to manage all the capabilities of a network card on windows unless you pay a bigger price for it. Compare, for example, what you can do with a 3com, realtek and/or marvell card on windows with what can offer a intel NIC. You'll be surprised to see how ridiculous are intel competitor's NIC drivers. To continue the line of 'made-for-windows and cheap': you can take a canyon web camera in 2005, want to upgrade to vista, and be surprised that the vendor don't offer a driver for vista for your camera. Isn't it good to use cheap solutions?

Linux didn't took a greater share on the market because everyone ran away from 'free' and 'unsupported'. These days, it seems that there are few heavy players like Acer, Asus etc, which are selling products with different linux distros preinstalled. That means that they are interested to support their platforms, and probably will contribute to the linux world in the application/driver area. The big companies usually are not willing to waste time for solutions which 'the systems admin knows how to handle', they prefer solutions which are known, supported and documented, which can be handled (for a fee, of course), by another systems administrator.

On the server area... there's another situation. Respectable hardware vendors offer good drivers and software to manage linux servers. I'm talking about IBM, HP,Fujitsu-Siemens, because I know about their support, there may be many others.

Until some major linux distribution won't be documented and supported at 50% compared with windows, linux for desktops will remain at a low share. If the functionality, software and hardware support and documentation will be at a comparable level, and the price at 40%-60% when compared to windows, then we'll see a significant reduction on M$-Tax and a much greater share for linux.

 

[gsacks]

Every article about Linux is bound to have about the same discussion themes show up in the comments. It is all really silly. "Linux doesn't play games", "Linux doesn't have the apps", "Linux zealots don't understand...". WHATEVER! Who really cares. Linux is an established OS in the SERVER market. No matter if it never becomes a viable desktop platform for the consumer masses, it is not going away anytime soon. As far as the desktop goes, it does many things very well, and you can't beat the price. If you are an avid gamer, then probably you should stick to Windows. If you run some niche app that is only available for Windows, then probably you should stick to Windows. If you just want to run whatever came on your PC on not bother with the techie stuff, then probably you should stick to Windows. (Though one might wonder what you are doing reading Tom's Hardware then if you are not into the techie stuff.) But if you are a techie type, and have some intellectual curiosity about what might be a very viable alternative OS, then you should check out Linux just for the fun of it. I've been running my HTPC on Ubuntu for over a year and I am extremely happy with it. I still use XP on my desktop because that is what I use for gaming. Gaming on Linux is like trying to hammer a nail with a screwdriver. It is just the wrong tool for the job. It makes an excellent screwdriver, but a lousy hammer. If you are complaining that it is a lousy hammer, then you have completely missed the point. Not everyone needs a hammer.

 

[KupuAnd1]

Try Linux Mint!
It is based on Ubuntu but it is more user friendly out of the box.
It uses the same repositories tan ubuntu, the menu (mintmenu) is better and it came with all the codecs, flash and java out of the box!!!!

 

[KupuAnd1]

I use Linux Mint which is based in Ubuntu.
The core is the same as Ubuntu but out of the box I think is the best linux distro out there.
It came with flash, codecs and java already install.
Even Ati and Nvidia drivers.
Try it, I used Ubuntu since the Dapper era but now I switch to Mint because all the answers for Ubuntu works for Mint and it is more user friendly.

 

[ap90033]

[citation][nom]gsacks[/nom]Every article about Linux is bound to have about the same discussion themes show up in the comments. It is all really silly. "Linux doesn't play games", "Linux doesn't have the apps", "Linux zealots don't understand...". WHATEVER! Who really cares. Linux is an established OS in the SERVER market. No matter if it never becomes a viable desktop platform for the consumer masses, it is not going away anytime soon. As far as the desktop goes, it does many things very well, and you can't beat the price. If you are an avid gamer, then probably you should stick to Windows. If you run some niche app that is only available for Windows, then probably you should stick to Windows. If you just want to run whatever came on your PC on not bother with the techie stuff, then probably you should stick to Windows. (Though one might wonder what you are doing reading Tom's Hardware then if you are not into the techie stuff.) But if you are a techie type, and have some intellectual curiosity about what might be a very viable alternative OS, then you should check out Linux just for the fun of it. I've been running my HTPC on Ubuntu for over a year and I am extremely happy with it. I still use XP on my desktop because that is what I use for gaming. Gaming on Linux is like trying to hammer a nail with a screwdriver. It is just the wrong tool for the job. It makes an excellent screwdriver, but a lousy hammer. If you are complaining that it is a lousy hammer, then you have completely missed the point. Not everyone needs a hammer.[/citation]
A lot of "techie" types do try linux (been trying it since Redhat 5.2) and just wonder if it will ever progress. Thats all, if you are happy with an OS that is technical and shows how smart you are while only being able to run mostly free (you get what you pay for saying does apply here on some of whats out there) apps thats fine. Others and I just see more potential there than that. I knew this would happen though, see earlier post about Linux being perfect for the special people. Not us regular Joes though.
I mean really instead of coming out with a new kernel every 5 minutes why not work on unifying, polishing, and application compatibility. Not trying to be negative just trying to give suggestions that could potentially make a difference. I mean imagine if Linux had say 30%+ instead of 1%- market share, what would happen then? A FREAKING LOT WOULD HAPPEN THEN. Seems like if so many REALLY like Linux that would excite them. But if they just want it to be for the Smart (aka Special) people then of course this sounds like a bad idea...

 

[Guest]

The article is good, but you the author was wrong about some things. First, 64bit Linux has the very same driver base as 32bit Linux; maybe some obscure proprietary driver for some odd hardware is not available for 64bit Linux, but most are.

I have to admit that 64bit Linux was a PITA when it first came out, mostly due to 32/64bit library mess, but with newer distros it's not an issue any more.

Second, as someone else already mentioned, there is a 64bit flash plugin, and Google Earh works in a 64bit enviroment too. Most 32bit software will work in a 64bit enviroment, as long as you install the required libraries.

The there is the NTFS write support issue. Read/write support for NTFS has been standard since a couple years now, thanks to the ntfs-3g project, so you will have NTFS write support out of the box. On a side note, If you have a Mac, don't worry, there is also HFS+ read/write support.

In most articles/forums/mailing-lists will tell you to use a terminal just because it is much more consistent, and it is also faster to do some things (like installing software). The author does not mention this, but because there are many Desktop Environments and Window Managers, lots of custom configuration apps for different distros, and those apps change from one version of a particular distribution to the next, it not easy to give a step by step GUI guide that suits all users.

 

[ap90033]

[citation][nom]ap90033[/nom]A lot of "techie" types do try linux (been trying it since Redhat 5.2) and just wonder if it will ever progress. Thats all, if you are happy with an OS that is technical and shows how smart you are while only being able to run mostly free (you get what you pay for saying does apply here on some of whats out there) apps thats fine. Others and I just see more potential there than that. I knew this would happen though, see earlier post about Linux being perfect for the special people. Not us regular Joes though. I mean really instead of coming out with a new kernel every 5 minutes why not work on unifying, polishing, and application compatibility. Not trying to be negative just trying to give suggestions that could potentially make a difference. I mean imagine if Linux had say 30%+ instead of 1%- market share, what would happen then? A FREAKING LOT WOULD HAPPEN THEN. Seems like if so many REALLY like Linux that would excite them. But if they just want it to be for the Smart (aka Special) people then of course this sounds like a bad idea...[/citation]

Hey do they have a X64 KDE Version?

 

[captaincharisma]

great the reviewer is another blind sheep in the "hate vista" heard

 

[redbullmonsta]

I have used Linux since around 1997 (setting up DNS servers for an ISP, and UNIX for years also (AIX), i have always had a linux box at home but have used windows as my primary operating system.

I tend to run xp64, i have 8gb ram and do lots of database work, i tried Vista (fail) and tried win 7 (epic fail)

Support for drivers was poor, even on vista which has been around for a while now, RAID drivers were the worst, but nVidia drivers seem to be poor too.

XP64 was stable 99% of the time

Vista approx 90% of the time - would get blue screens 1-2 times per week and system was soooooo slow in general

Win 7 is faster than Vista but Blue screens all the time

I now run Linux (gentoo stage 3) and installed Ubuntu on my work machine, its great - it just works, all my troubles have disapeared, i am happier than ever with my OS

On a side note, i loved windows gaming, but went and got a PS3 and a stack of games.

 

[Guest]

ap90033: Yes there are 64bit version of KDE. Everything there is for 32bit, there is for 64bit in GNU/Linux. Kubuntu is Ubuntu with KDE. You can also try Mandriva, which used to be a KDE-centric distro.

captaincharisma: just because someone does not like something in particular is hater?