Canonical trying to lure XP users with the release of Ubuntu 14.04 LTS for Desktop

After the recent release of Ubuntu 14.04 LTS for servers, Canonical has announced the brand new desktop version. With Windows XP's life support having ended on April 8, the latest iteration of Ubuntu is a more-than-suitable replacement for the dead OS.

There are a range of improvements to the latest version of the popular distro, such as "a slicker experience, with improvements to the Unity [user interface]", Canonical stated. The OS has a variety of software included for everyday users, as well as businesses, such as the open-source equivalent of Microsoft Office, LibreOffice.

Ubuntu 14.04 LTS shows that the company is moving toward a more unified experience across phones, tablets, and PC's with the introduction of the Unity 8 interface for Desktop, which is used on the mobile version of Ubuntu.

Along with other XP users switching to Ubuntu, the French police force is moving over 70,000 computers from XP to Ubuntu 14.04 LTS, which is guaranteed to be supported for 5 years after the initial release. The Chief Information and Security Officer in Gendarmerie, Stéphane Dumon​ has stated that their "project to replace Windows XP with Ubuntu on over 70,000 desktops is returning significant benefits; already we've lowered the total cost of ownership for a ratio of 40 percent, eliminated license costs and radically reduced technical problems."

Many companies recently have paid Microsoft billions of dollars to continue support for their computers while they search for alternatives. Cheaper, and more secure alternatives, such as Ubuntu 14.04 LTS for desktops may prove to be a viable choice for the users that are fleeing from Windows XP.

Source: Ubuntu via The Inquirer | Image via Ubuntu

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft releases new Windows 8.1 themes that travel around the world

Next Story

Office Mix discovered, sign up for the preview now

118 Comments

View more comments

Not worth the headache unless you do absolutely nothing but surf the web and use a word processor. Everything else is over complicated for the average user.

lolneowin said,
Not worth the headache unless you do absolutely nothing but surf the web and use a word processor. Everything else is over complicated for the average user.

You're obviously never used a modern GNU/Linux distro.

simplezz said,

You're obviously never used a modern GNU/Linux distro.

I have used Ubuntu 12 and it was a f'in nightmare. Trying to learn how to install things from command prompt because it wasn't offered in the official packages, adding all these packages from god knows who was creating them, troubleshooting that ###### sound system with that god awful alsamixer or whatever the hell it was.

And before that I tried Ubuntu 8? The wireless issues were amazing on that one.

Then all the troubleshooting guides on Google were always outdated pointing to previous versions! All had me running a bunch of commands I had no idea what were doing, it was a f'in nightmare. Good ####ing luck with Linux to an average computer literate person if you run into problems.

On Windows it's straight forward and super easy to troubleshoot. Some people love tinkering around and fixing ####, I don't. I want my OS to work and when it doesn't, I want to fix it with the least amount of effort. I don't have time to look through 80 guides and runs 200 commands.

that's exactly the problem with Linux, its not one. you mentioned 4 already. and also forgot to say they are based on different iteration of Linux builds so they are technically different OS. don't get me wrong, I like Ubuntu and I think its the friendliest and most fun OS but looking at the UI, its very different year to year and thats not what users want. they want consistency and usability. Free stuff you mentioned is good but none of which is viable. for instance there is not a single application that you can rely on for professional work. Libre Office is good but as not good as MS Office. lacks many features and this is a trend for all apps. free is good but not when you want to get some work done.

trojan_market said,
that's exactly the problem with Linux, its not one. you mentioned 4 already. and also forgot to say they are based on different iteration of Linux builds so they are technically different OS.

How are they different operating systems? Besides the DE they are pretty much identical.

trojan_market said,
for instance there is not a single application that you can rely on for professional work

That depends on your profession. I work on Linux exclusively, so for me it's professionaly realiable.

ichi said,

How are they different operating systems? Besides the DE they are pretty much identical.

That depends on your profession. I work on Linux exclusively, so for me it's professionaly realiable.


Open Source MS Word wannabes can't print out my resume correctly...

trojan_market said,
that's exactly the problem with Linux, its not one. you mentioned 4 already.

They are variations of the same base, namely Ubuntu/Debian. Each one has the same init system, the same package management tool (apt-get). Only the GUI flavour differs. One can even have multiple desktop environments installed and selectable at the display manager. That's a positive, not a negative as you're trying to portray it as. Everybody can choose the UI they prefer, safe in the knowledge that the underlying structure is consistent.

trojan_market said,

and also forgot to say they are based on different iteration of Linux builds so they are technically different OS.

Linux is constantly changing. I'm on a rolling release (Arch), and some times I update once a week, other times not for three months or more. It's not like Windows, where you might get a new version in 3-5 years if you're lucky.

trojan_market said,

don't get me wrong, I like Ubuntu and I think its the friendliest and most fun OS but looking at the UI, its very different year to year and thats not what users want. they want consistency and usability.

You mean like the consistency of going from Windows 7 to Windows 8's metroland? Hehe.

Actually I disagree. The base Ubuntu, which I might add can be customised to each user's preference, is very consistent has been for some time. The biggest change of recent times was the introduction of unity. Since then, I haven't seen anything that big. Certainly nothing on the scale of Microsoft's Metro, which replaces the well known and liked desktop paradigm with a fisher price toy meant for tablets.

trojan_market said,

Free stuff you mentioned is good but none of which is viable. for instance there is not a single application that you can rely on for professional work.

Gimp, Inkscape, GCC, Libre Office, Blender, Android Studio, Eclipse, QT, GTK. The list goes on and on.

trojan_market said,

Libre Office is good but as not good as MS Office. lacks many features

Name me one essential feature that's missing. I've used OpenOffice/LibreOffice for years and never found it lacking.

trojan_market said,

and this is a trend for all apps. free is good but not when you want to get some work done.

I do all my serious work on GNU/Linux. As a professional, I couldn't do without the terminal and the FOSS ecosystem. Try using Window's console or powershell for a day - it's like grinding nails on a chalkboard.

_Alexander said,

Open Source MS Word wannabes can't print out my resume correctly...

Well, I don't make a living out of printing resumes :D then again you can face similar problems if you try to print anything with a different version of MS Office than the one you wrote it with.

For anything I'd not be printing myself with the same program I used to write it I'd use pdf. I could even have used LaTeX to write the document and it would print frigging fine everywhere.

as many linux versions, I was referring to KDE, GNOME .... the only thing they have in common is the core OS. which you don't want to get near. Professional programs, I forgot to mention unless you're a developer (exclusive open source developer) or a webmaster(exclusive open source hosting) Linux is not a professional machine for you. Professional Audio, Video Editing tools is really non-existence. Libre Office is a good free tool but name one single real office that uses it as a daily tool for letters, emails stuff. its just not reliable enough.

trojan_market said,
as many linux versions, I was referring to KDE, GNOME .... the only thing they have in common is the core OS. which you don't want to get near. Professional programs, I forgot to mention unless you're a developer (exclusive open source developer) or a webmaster(exclusive open source hosting) Linux is not a professional machine for you. Professional Audio, Video Editing tools is really non-existence. Libre Office is a good free tool but name one single real office that uses it as a daily tool for letters, emails stuff. its just not reliable enough.

Again it depends on your profession:

http://vimeo.com/m/44420219

That's a reel from a Brazilian company that uses Blender on Ubuntu to do their work.

And I'm neither open source developer nor webmaster by the way.

Edited by ichi, Apr 22 2014, 5:08am :

ichi said,

That's a reel from a Brazilian company that uses Blender on Ubuntu to do their work.

again maybe few companies are like this, but most companies prefer to get the job done and stay on top of it. open source is not a good idea for a professional software and specially for modeling and CPU intensive applications. Its common sense when you can make so much more money spending some dollors on a good and feature rich software package with proper support is no brainer. not to mention it helps developers wrote that software.

Seems to me that Ovni VFX are getting their work done.

You aren't limited to open source apps on Linux though, you also have professional proprietary apps like Maya, Houdini, Lightwave, Inferno, Flame, Smoke, DraftSight, Softimage, Realflow...

Linux isn't suited for absolutely every professional area, but that doesn't mean it's not excellent for some of them.

I don't know what they are using now, but back in the day both Pixar and ILM switched from SGI to Linux workstations. Dreamworks runs almost entirely on Linux.

It's a simple choice really: if their software runs on Linux why the hell would they want to buy Windows?
You usually hear "yeah well but that's only for renderfarms", but I'm talking about workstations there.

Bottom line is that you choose the right tool for the job, and Linux is the right tool for many of them (albeit obviously not all).

I seriously have problem with this statement that linux is suitable for many professional jobs as in real work only very few companies use Linux (except for academics due to licence issues and learning nature, servers and hosting companies and open source development) as I stated before Opensource software suite also can never be as good as closed one. maybe some paid applications managed to get to linux but its open nature of linux is its worst enemy and developer want to make money, why would anyone code for free and yet do it better than who gets paid for it?

trojan_market said,
I seriously have problem with this statement that linux is suitable for many professional jobs as in real work only very few companies use Linux (except for academics due to licence issues and learning nature, servers and hosting companies and open source development)

I already named some companies that work with Linux, and no small companies at that.

trojan_market said,
why would anyone code for free and yet do it better than who gets paid for it?

Even if we were to assume that being paid somehow improves the quality of your work, as far as I know all of RedHat and Canonical employees get their paychecks, and so do the hundreds of developers contributing from HP, Intel, IBM, Oracle, Texas Instruments, Google and the likes.

The story about Linux being developed as a hobby by basement nerds is a myth.

Now maybe you could think "why in hell would any of those companies pay developers to work on a free OS".

See:
- HP got a nice contract with Dreamworks so supply all their Linux based workstations, working together to optimize it all as per Dreamworks needs. That means not only a hardware contract but also ongoing support. Widen the scope and you'll see a business right there.
- IBM is obvious, they are selling Linux servers.
- Google uses Linux both in-house and as base for their Android and ChromeOS products.

For all those contributing companies the OS is a tool, not the final product.

Edited by ichi, Apr 22 2014, 8:08pm :

ichi said,


- HP got a nice contract with Dreamworks so supply all their Linux based workstations, working together to optimize it all as per Dreamworks needs. That means not only a hardware contract but also ongoing support. Widen the scope and you'll see a business right there.
- IBM is obvious, they are selling Linux servers.
- Google uses Linux both in-house and as base for their Android and ChromeOS products.

all of these three are falling to categories which I mentioned.
HP -Linux servers, although to the best of my knowledge they are Microsoft Partner.
IBM - Linux Servers, although IBM's primary focus is UNIX based systems not Linux
Google - Open source developmentt, although many google division using windows based machines for development

trojan_market said,

HP -Linux servers, although to the best of my knowledge they are Microsoft Partner.

That doesn't preclude them selling Linux based systems - which they do. As well as Android, ChromeOS, etc.

trojan_market said,

IBM - Linux Servers, although IBM's primary focus is UNIX based systems not Linux

IBM has transitioned to mostly Linux now.

trojan_market said,

Google - Open source developmentt, although many google division using windows based machines for development

From what I've read, Google prefers employees to use Linux or OS X. That's probably due to the IE security breach a few years back.

Windows apps can be developed and tested on Linux machines using cross compliation (MinGW) and WINE anyway. A VM inside a Linux host is another option too.

trojan_market said,

all of these three are falling to categories which I mentioned.
HP -Linux servers, although to the best of my knowledge they are Microsoft Partner.
IBM - Linux Servers, although IBM's primary focus is UNIX based systems not Linux
Google - Open source developmentt, although many google division using windows based machines for development

I didn't mention those three as examples of companies using Linux (no matter if they do or not) but as contributors to the OS. The companies signing the paychecks of those that write the code.

The customers of some of those companies (as in the Dreamworks example I mentioned) are the ones doing the actual work using Linux.

HP sells servers, but they also sell software and related service contracts. Lately (as in the last three years) they've been transitioning a lot of their corporate business software to Linux, just because that's where customers want the software running.

Maybe it's the tight economy (or maybe it started as a byproduct of the economy and then they realized that there was money to be saved there no matter how well they were doing) but customers don't find all that enticing to pay the licenses of a Microsoft metrocluster for software that runs on RedHat perfectly fine.

And if HP software didn't run there you could safely bet that IBM or BMC would come knocking to fill the gap.

Same goes for workstations: Dreamworks is modeling with Maya and they want it on Linux, so that's what HP serves. Same would go for Pixar and whatever provider they have.

Regarding IBM, there were strong on z/OS but they have been shifting to Linux, even going to the lengths of porting the OS to their System Z mainframes.
IBM (same as HP) doesn't just sell the iron, they make a lot of money from the ongoing (maybe even more than from the iron itself) so even with Linux licenses coming cheaper than those of z/OS they still have pretty much the same tasty business there.

And besides their mainframe stuff, they are also strong on Linux software and middleware.

I don't see where they are targeting XP users explicitly, but of course they'll try to get Windows users to switch.

I mean, the weird thing would be that they didn't try.

I really like Ubuntu but every time I tried to use it as my primary machine I hit some deadend road. I think even expired XP practically is way better OS than Ubuntu.

Last time I tried to make a Linux desktop my wife almost shot me.

For her it was the font rendering.

Although XP->Ubuntu might provide better font rendering ?

"1 Adam 12. 1 Adam 12. Report of shots fired. Seems to be a dispute over fonts. Respond Code 3."

"1 Adam 12. Roger."

simplezz said,
...

Awesome!

I may have to try Linux again, oh wait I get all of this out of the box on Windows.

In all seriousness I am going to try linux again thanks to this package.

Commenting is disabled on this article.