Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
patseguin

Linux Instead of Windows

151 posts in this topic

I've gotta say, having switched to cinnamin from gnufail 3.6 recently, I find it pretty outstanding, it's still not perfect but it's darn close :) thanks to everyone that suggested to try it!

At the moment, the most limiting factor of linux in terms of graphics is that it uses X11 still, which is just old old OLD! OK so it does work on the world's oldest hardware and it doesn't need hardware accelleration at all, but because of that it doesn't support a lot of stuff. Once wayland becomes improved (it's still in it's infancy) then you'll be seeing very slick GNU/Linux graphics, and you even run multiple X11 sessions inside of wayland too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using Linux Mint in a VMWare box full screen right now (typing this from there). Even in a VM, it runs great and what a polished OS! I'm still scared to switch to it as a main OS because I fear the command line and it seems you need a computer science degree to install any new drivers or software, lol.

Anyone here compared Mint to ubuntu? I have both installed and like Mint better, why I'm not sure yet.

Here's a question: My system has 2x 256GB SSD's and 2x 3TB HD's (Windows RAID0). Would I be able to install Linux on the second SSD and then have a dual boot menu? If I understand naming conventions, my SSD's are sda and sdb and the 2 HDD's are sdc and sdd. I would want to format sdb and install it there right? How can I make sure I'm not making a mistake and formatting my Windows 8 drive, like maybe Windows 8 is actually on sdb?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Always been a Fedora fan myself, I just wish Ubuntu would give the option to download an installer with Gnome shell instead of unity so I don't have to play in dependency hell. They were going to at one time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never cared for Linux much. I like some key factors about it in general. I try some distro's out every few years but always feels a step behind with 1 leg. Still no Netflix or even ITunes in Wine, I laughed at Banshee..etc for my Ipad, like really?. Never could get .AAC conversion to work in my car. Still had to google for things I wanted or needed to change only to still be forced to copy n paste command lines. No, not in 2012 I won't. THE main drawback for me was the software itself, either lacks some features/too basic or the UI is oldschool compared to some commercial apps that i'm used to on Windows, like Any video converter..etc. Thankfully Nvidia FINALLY released a decent and proper driver thanks to Valve's Steam. Not for Valve, NV wouldn't have done crap. Likely Steam will never offer the library selection like Windows but one can hope.

meh, w8 does everything I need it to, using Start8 and Decor8 to make the UI nicer, I can buy hardware and any software on a shelf, see its compatable and just plug it in with little to no fuss, no commands, no tricks or hours of google hunts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Linux isn't an "easy-go" OS. You have to work at it. You learn Linux as you do Windows. If you had originally started with Linux, you would be calling Windows a bunch of crap.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you had originally started with Linux, you would be calling Windows a bunch of crap.

Personal preference. Grew up with Unix before there even was a Linux, and I personally still prefer to use Windows. As flexible, no not even close, but there's a lot to be said for the "it just works" factor.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a question: My system has 2x 256GB SSD's and 2x 3TB HD's (Windows RAID0). Would I be able to install Linux on the second SSD and then have a dual boot menu? If I understand naming conventions, my SSD's are sda and sdb and the 2 HDD's are sdc and sdd. I would want to format sdb and install it there right? How can I make sure I'm not making a mistake and formatting my Windows 8 drive, like maybe Windows 8 is actually on sdb?

The drive naming is somewhat subjective. One of your SSD's could be sda one time and sdb the next time you reboot. That is why they are normally identified and mounted by their universally unique identifier (UUID). However, you don't need to worry about that because virtually any modern Linux installer will identify and mount them for you properly. As for installing Mint or Ubuntu on your secondary SSD, the easiest way to make sure you have the right drive is to go by partition labels. If, for example, your Windows installation on the first SDD has the partition label WINDOWS, the second SSD has a partition with the label RAR, you can use Disk Utility, GParted, or maybe even the installer from the live install disc to identify which drive contains WINDOWS and which contains RAR. The two 1 TB drives are easy to discard because of their size. Format the SSD containing RAR and install your Mint or Ubuntu. Each partition will be mounted properly from then on based on UUID.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I tried first installing mint from a DVD from Windows 8 and it rebooted to complete then gave me some error. I uninstalled it then booted of the DVD and went to install, "didn't detect any installed operating systems". I'd hoped I could install this and dual boot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personal preference. Grew up with Unix before there even was a Linux, and I personally still prefer to use Windows. As flexible, no not even close, but there's a lot to be said for the "it just works" factor.

I definitely agree with you: to a large extent its personal preference. However, I, like many others here, I think, went the opposite way; I started with Windows and moved to Linux. While the "it just works" factor is certainly very important, I place more value on the customization aspect of the operating system. I like its open-source nature. I like the way that the operating system works. I don't mind the fact that it is not quite as easy to use, although Ubuntu is challenging even that, I value the other things that I mentioned more.

Well, I tried first installing mint from a DVD from Windows 8 and it rebooted to complete then gave me some error. I uninstalled it then booted of the DVD and went to install, "didn't detect any installed operating systems". I'd hoped I could install this and dual boot.

Try installing Mint by booting off of the installation disc directly. Don't install it from within Windows. Based on the setup you have described, using your secondary SSD as the boot disc, you probably want to install it natively, not using Wubi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Linux isn't an "easy-go" OS. You have to work at it. You learn Linux as you do Windows. If you had originally started with Linux, you would be calling Windows a bunch of crap.

I really disagree with this. Linux UI has been dreadful in the past and I am very unhappy even now with Unity.

Out of the many problems with Linux and a lot of open source programs, programmers have designed UI and it's obvious.

Programmers should never be allowed to make UI as they never have understood good UI standards.

I always disliked the way Linus always wanted to model Linux after Unix. I really wished he would have had UI designed design the default UI as a standard and let people modify look and feel from there.

He could have taken some of the ideas like security from Unix, but not the command set and programmer look and feel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking about trying SUSE or Fedora myself and checking out Gnome 3. I'm really likeing KDE, but it just weird sometimes in terms of drivers and what not. I installed the latest NVIDIA driver and I can't enable kwin anymore plus my boot screen looks ugly--instead of having the sexy silver k-gear with dots, its a pixalated white screen that looks like it's straight from 1985. I realize it's most likely NVIDIA's fault, but I'm tired of Linux getting treated like a 2nd class OS---like Windows and OS X are any better...pffftt....I hope Wayland really fixes a lot of the graphical glitches when we finally jump over and Valve bringing Steam over opens developers eyes and changes Linux for the better. I really love and enjoy Linux.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Linux is and always will be driven by the terminal. All the GUI does is make things easier for noobs.

And yet, here we stand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is not the OS, it's the software... I know, I know there is "alternative" to everything, but most of the time, those "alternative" are not as good, incomplete or plain crap.

Since Windows is the dominant standard, followed by MacOS, it's hard to find "corporate" software for Linux, you know, like Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator, good programming tools like Visual Studio, iTune (hey, I have an iPad and iPod), AutoCAD, .... and the list goes on....

Again, I know WINE exist, but why "emulate" Windows? Just run the real thing instead and you'll have less bugs...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been on Ubuntu for a good 3 weeks now, and never went back to my Windows side yet. You know why? 90% of my programs were already open source. Open/Libre Office, VLC, Firefox, Minecraft, etc. The only programs I could not carry over was Photoshop CS5, but I find Gimp to be rather nice, once you start messing with it.

If it was plain crap, why would they put it in the repositories? Heck, you can run Windows in a Virtualbox from Linux...

Again, you have to learn it for it to work the way you want. Same way you start with any other software, no matter what OS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is not the OS, it's the software... I know, I know there is "alternative" to everything, but most of the time, those "alternative" are not as good, incomplete or plain crap.

Most people go into places like Best Buy to get their software. I do it too, at times. Until people can do the same for Linux, Linux will never take off. The multimedia apps for Linux is so lacking. I like Paintshop Pro and Photoshop Elements for graphics, much more than the Gimp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is not the OS, it's the software... I know, I know there is "alternative" to everything, but most of the time, those "alternative" are not as good, incomplete or plain crap.

Since Windows is the dominant standard, followed by MacOS, it's hard to find "corporate" software for Linux, you know, like Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator, good programming tools like Visual Studio, iTune (hey, I have an iPad and iPod), AutoCAD, .... and the list goes on....

Again, I know WINE exist, but why "emulate" Windows? Just run the real thing instead and you'll have less bugs...

There is a lot of "corporate", by which I assume you mean commercial, software available for Linux. However, you're right: for some occupations the selection of commercial software is weak. MATLAB, which I use on a regular basis and cannot do my job without, not only runs well on Linux, but is designed for Linux first. The version of MATLAB available for Windows is compiled with Cygwin, and the version for OS X uses X11. There is other software that I use for embedded development, such as the HI-TECH C compiler, that runs quite well on Linux. Qt and its development environment also work well on Linux. Therefore I contend that the availability of commercial software for Linux depends on your needs (and occupation). For me, its actually preferred.

As for WINE, its not designed to emulate the WIN32 API perfectly. (In fact, WINE stands for WINE Is Not an Emulator.) Its a stop-gap measure designed to help ease the transition to Linux, not to be used to run the majority of your software.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a professional software developer, writing applications for Windows for nearly 15 years. Microsoft has done extensive UI research, actually contributing a lot to the UX community's understanding of workflows and how the human eye works and how to make UI's easy to use. *Comically, Windows 8 does not follow most of Microsoft's own UI guidelines, but at least it's still the "Windows" API at the core.

Linux's biggest strength is also its biggest weakness: There is no standard and everything can be tweaked to the user's liking. If two people on the street say they use Linux, there is a good chance that their two systems are completely different, with a totally different set of UI tools and APIs available. If they have KDE, Qt is installed. GNOME means there is Gtk. TWM means there may not be either. Maybe they don't even have a window manager because they use the command line. How am I supposed to write software for them? I have to provide a Qt, Gtk, and X11 version of everything because I can't count on a common API to be installed. It would not be very nice of me to force my users to install something they don't want just so they can run my program. There is no such thing as the "Linux UX"; the user experience changes from distribution to distribution depending on how the packagers have decided the system should look.

For Linux to become mainstream, this needs to be fixed. But this would take away one of the things people love about Linux, hence it can't ever become "mainstream". Instead, a particular flavor of Linux will have to stand out as "the one". It seems like 32-bit Ubuntu is making inroads in this regard, since it's the platform Valve will support with Steam. I suspect there will be an influx of Ubuntu users in the coming year but ironically this influx will tend to drive the Linux community away from Ubuntu and Canonical. The community wants Linux to succeed over Windows, but they don't want the necessary outcome for this to happen. Writing applications for Linux without forcing your user to install the UI library you want them to install is a nightmare.

Of course, if there is a standard and I have just missed it completely, please tell me. You will save me an incredible amount of work. :laugh:

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been on Ubuntu for a good 3 weeks now, and never went back to my Windows side yet. You know why? 90% of my programs were already open source. Open/Libre Office, VLC, Firefox, Minecraft, etc. The only programs I could not carry over was Photoshop CS5, but I find Gimp to be rather nice, once you start messing with it.

If it was plain crap, why would they put it in the repositories? Heck, you can run Windows in a Virtualbox from Linux...

Again, you have to learn it for it to work the way you want. Same way you start with any other software, no matter what OS.

This is the opposite for me. Most programs (read almost all) on Linux are on Windows already and it's much easier to start at the top and work your way down. In other words, Windows has a lot more programs that I enjoy that

would not run with Wine, but I can use Virtual Box or VMware on Windows to run Linux.

You guys know there are FREE (as in beer) programs to give you an entirely different look on your Windows desktop such as (Rainmeter and Samurize). You can customize them to the point that they don't even look like desktops anymore if you want, you can trick it out like a automobile and because they use layered effects, it hardly takes up any processor power.

I have never thought honestly that Linux was better than Windows (except for a few things like software repositories and maybe security through obscurity), it has worked for me for a long time and Linux while it's good, it's really not that good. Linux was over-hyped by a lot of hardcore users and when I tried it, I did like it, but hasn't wowed me or changed my world (the only exception to this is Asterisk which rocks).

Software is where I really have a hard time with Linux, almost all of it has the same port on Windows and it can't run the real windows programs that are quality. Some can run through Wine, but Wine is far from 100 percent.

I just use it as a test bed for my VM's and testing different web applications on different versions of PHP and mysql as well as Asterisk which is great, but I wouldn't run it on my desktop PC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also one more thing as I look at it. I have tried a lot of multimedia programs on Linux and they were not good. Even some DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) programs on Linux and they again were very basic and the UI was garbage.

On Windows there are a ton of DAW programs out there and of different qualities but there is more choice and more quality than the Linux community.

Free isn't always better. Sometimes it is worth it to pay for quality software. I know Richard Stallman isn't happy, but let him eat his toenails. I think working at a job is better than starving on a street corner if you know what I mean.

Open source has always had this hippy it has to be available to everyone and I think that is fine as long as Richard Stallman and the people agree with him are not in the movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well obviously free isn't always better. I think it goes without saying that the general rule of thumb is having a large team of full-time workers creating a product is going to be better than sporatic partial code submissions from the spare time of people around the world, they've got motivation to get paid so are going to work on it pretty fast.

There are however some great pieces of free/open source software which are against the rule and actually better than paid alternatives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a professional software developer, writing applications for Windows for nearly 15 years. Microsoft has done extensive UI research, actually contributing a lot to the UX community's understanding of workflows and how the human eye works and how to make UI's easy to use. *Comically, Windows 8 does not follow most of Microsoft's own UI guidelines, but at least it's still the "Windows" API at the core.

Linux's biggest strength is also its biggest weakness: There is no standard and everything can be tweaked to the user's liking. If two people on the street say they use Linux, there is a good chance that their two systems are completely different, with a totally different set of UI tools and APIs available. If they have KDE, Qt is installed. GNOME means there is Gtk. TWM means there may not be either. Maybe they don't even have a window manager because they use the command line. How am I supposed to write software for them? I have to provide a Qt, Gtk, and X11 version of everything because I can't count on a common API to be installed. It would not be very nice of me to force my users to install something they don't want just so they can run my program. There is no such thing as the "Linux UX"; the user experience changes from distribution to distribution depending on how the packagers have decided the system should look.

For Linux to become mainstream, this needs to be fixed. But this would take away one of the things people love about Linux, hence it can't ever become "mainstream". Instead, a particular flavor of Linux will have to stand out as "the one". It seems like 32-bit Ubuntu is making inroads in this regard, since it's the platform Valve will support with Steam. I suspect there will be an influx of Ubuntu users in the coming year but ironically this influx will tend to drive the Linux community away from Ubuntu and Canonical. The community wants Linux to succeed over Windows, but they don't want the necessary outcome for this to happen. Writing applications for Linux without forcing your user to install the UI library you want them to install is a nightmare.

Of course, if there is a standard and I have just missed it completely, please tell me. You will save me an incredible amount of work. :laugh:

Nice to hear from a software developers perspective and everything you say seems spot on. If Linux ever did become mainstream, commercial developers would have to make their source code open and I can't see how that would be a good thing for someone trying to sell and support software.

Anyways, a previous user mentioned Fedora so I installed it in a vm. It seems very vanilla and virtually everything I installed had to download prerequisites. I should this the appeal of Fedora?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If Linux ever did become mainstream, commercial developers would have to make their source code open and I can't see how that would be a good thing for someone trying to sell and support software."

No they wouldn't. Go and look at nvidia drivers, or steam for linux, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't part of developing anything for Linux the source code must be open? I thought that was just a part of Linux

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying KUbuntu right now and I like it. Do people generally accept KDE or Gnome more? KDE seems less Windows-like than Gnome, at least on this Ubuntu distro...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.