Is Linux nearing XP usability?


I prefer:  

407 members have voted

  1. 1. I prefer:

    • Windows xp
      298
    • pre xpLinux free
      64
    • Linux commercial
      45


Recommended Posts

When y/our competition is as powerful, successful, and as well-funded as Microsoft is then you cannot overestimate their capabilities.

I was not underestimating the capabilities of Microsoft as a company.

They have resources, plenty of them financial. But they are falling back, Linux is powered

by a worldwide community.

I'll give you an eg. : when some security flaw is discovered on a system running Linux on some cases it takes only few hours even less for a patched version to be realesed, if this happens on Windows what can you do if not wait and despaire for it to be put on Windows update site... Too long if you have a productive machine.

i could NEVER get my digicam which was supposedly win-xp approved to work in windows xp.

i got another model, this one worked, but if i unplugged it and plugged it back in, it wouldnt work. id have to restart to get it to work again.

thats not exactly my definition of "usable."

585380716[/snapback]

did you ever get it to work with Linux? Funny how you mentioned that you couldn't get it work with XP. I have a Sony Mavica that works well with XP...but I still haven't figured out how to get it to work with Linux. *sigh*

Where Microsoft wins is in the User Interface department. Take installing software which on Windows is as straightforward as double-clicking the installation file. In Linux often it involves going to the terminal (or "command line"), an alien concept to many users, then typing in ./ install. Before that you must make sure you are in the right directory either by cut-and-paste or by manually typing it out. Heaven forbid if you don't then come up against some dialoge asking you to choose the directory to put it in and that is confusing in itself, with choices like "/ust", "/var", and other nonsensical labels, or some dialgue asking you for an administrative password. In Linux when you want to uninstall software you have to hunt down the application folder and find the uninstall file. In Windows you can just go to the control panel then add/remove programs and click "remove" on the application you want to uninstall.

The complexity of this process befudles many users. Many of these choices should be made automatically (such as installation location) like in Windows.

I feel once installation of new applications is made much simpler then Linux will

Where Microsoft wins is in the User Interface department. Take installing software which on Windows is as straightforward as double-clicking the installation file. In Linux often it involves going to the terminal (or "command line"), an alien concept to many users, then typing in ./ install. Before that you must make sure you are in the right directory either by cut-and-paste or by manually typing it out. Heaven forbid if you don't then come up against some dialoge asking you to choose the directory to put it in and that is confusing in itself, with choices like "/ust", "/var", and other nonsensical labels, or some dialgue asking you for an administrative password. In Linux when you want to uninstall software you have to hunt down the application folder and find the uninstall file. In Windows you can just go to the control panel then add/remove programs and click "remove" on the application you want to uninstall.

The complexity of this process befudles many users. Many of these choices should be made automatically (such as installation location) like in Windows.

I feel once installation of new applications is made much simpler then Linux will

585381031[/snapback]

So you had to:

find website

download software

double click on exe

go through install options choosing place to install, icon on desktop etc

In linux I:

open my package installer

choose the software i want to install

click go

Which is more confusing?

with windows and OSX, you feel like you are trying to trick the computer into working. linux it gives you a lot more freedom.

585379954[/snapback]

Tricking it?.......for windows....I would some what agree. But for OS X...I for sure would not. There is for sure no guessing game in OS X...and Linux...I like...

No, sorry, Linux is screwed on the desktop until someone works out a proper installation format (like autopackage.org). It needs to be:

Binary

Cross-distro

Free for commercial use

Has a great UI for installing stuff.

Can resolve dependancies 'well'.

Autopackage has all of that, but it's still not ready.

It would be impossible to have a 'universal' apt-get repo with hundreds of thousands of tested, no-dependancy-problems, mirrored-in-hours-of-official-release. Imagine the hardware requirements of it, with some games being 5GB big, you'd need a few petabytes just to store the games. Nevermind all the rest of the software.

And if anyone says 'Linux can do fine without commercial software! We'll write our own!', I'm afraid the answer is a big fat no. Games, for example, just ain't possible with a libre development process, because it's usually 15% coding and 85% non-portable graphics/sound/video/modelling which can only be used for that project. I could give you loads of other niche software that OSS will never fill (think of little programs that are in VB at the moment, they'll be millions of them around the world).

Consider that Linux does not put a short-cut of folder in the application menu (the "start" menu) or icons to access it on the desktop or on the panel.
Urm, yes it does

I meant to say that it is not consistent as it is with almost all Windows applications.

And see this interesting article:

A Linux Geek Embraces Mac OS X

"Installing applications [in Mac OS X] was extremely convenient, you just drag the install file to your Applications folder and that's pretty much it. This didn't throw me because I had heard something about it in one of our forums a while back, so when it came time to install something, I just dragged and dropped it into the Applications folder. Linux distributors should steal this idea from Apple. Linux newbies would love this kind of convenience."

Where Microsoft wins is in the User Interface department. Take installing software which on Windows is as straightforward as double-clicking the installation file. In Linux often it involves going to the terminal (or "command line"), an alien concept to many users, then typing in ./ install. Before that you must make sure you are in the right directory either by cut-and-paste or by manually typing it out. Heaven forbid if you don't then come up against some dialoge asking you to choose the directory to put it in and that is confusing in itself, with choices like "/ust", "/var", and other nonsensical labels, or some dialgue asking you for an administrative password. In Linux when you want to uninstall software you have to hunt down the application folder and find the uninstall file. In Windows you can just go to the control panel then add/remove programs and click "remove" on the application you want to uninstall.

The complexity of this process befudles many users. Many of these choices should be made automatically (such as installation location) like in Windows.

I feel once installation of new applications is made much simpler then Linux will

585381031[/snapback]

or you could just use Synaptic

I think gobolinux can do that drag and drop style installation already, but i'm not entirely sure.

In what way is it not consistent? The windows way is horribly inconsistent, what goes in the start menu is up to the individual software producers, and they quite often put a bizarre heap of crap in there.

My gnome menu has only program launchers (aka shortcuts), thats consistence.

edit: hi code_monkey

"Autopackage, the distro neutral binary packaging framework for Linux systems.

* Build packages that will install on many different distros

* Multiple front ends: best is automatically chosen so GUI users get a graphical front end, and command line users get a text based interface

* Multiple language support (both in tools and for your own packages)

* Automatically verifies and resolves dependencies no matter how the software was installed. This means you don't have to use autopackage for all your software, or even any of it, for packages to succesfully install."

That's is so cool!

that article sucks.

while he has some good points, the reason those things arent in KDE is not because they cant be replicated, its because noone wants them.

i dont want a start button, i prefer the k. i dont want a "order prints from one of MS's bitches" button next to my pictures. i dont want a print button there. because i never USE those. they just take up space in xp. even if i DID want to print a picture in linux, i dont want to go through a wizard to do it. i want to use the program I want to print it with.

For the people that still havent realised how expensive and low quality it is to print a picture on an inkjet, they can continue to use windows. :yes:

and the K menu is MUCH better than the start menu. it organizes everything by category so it never takes 3 panes to show all your programs. i have AT LEAST a hundred different programs in my k menu, yet it only is one single menu that doesnt take up the whole screen.

also, when you are in xp start menu and you want to browse your C drive through menus, or if you go new-something in a context menu, it takes FOREVER to load those menus. linux is instantant.

I think markjensen is right. Once you get it configured (which has always been a pain in the ass for me, probably just specific hardware) it's fine for people who don't know a lot about computers.

I think that at its core, though, Windows is still easier for the super-beginner. It has a bunch of wizards and buttons everywhere related to things you might want to do and a consistant, inituitive UI.

yes, it does take some time to learn the ropes. but ive gotten to the point where i can take a formatted computer and set it up 100% with yoper in 20 minutes or less.

with linux, there is a learning curve, but at least you learn.

in windows, after you figure out the interface, you cant learn anymore. thats the biggest reason i stopped using it. it was a waste of time. you just end up spending all day trying to patch the computer against spyware/virii and get rid of the crap MS put on it to optimise it. that is something you dont have to worry about in linux. just choose a distro taht is optimised enough for your tastes, install it, and get to work.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • AMD RX 9070 GRE AI, Blender benchmarks vs 9070 XT, 7800XT, Nvidia RTX 5070, 4070 by Sayan Sen Earlier this week, we shared the first part of our review of AMD's new RX 9070 GRE. It was about the gaming performance of the GPU, and we gave it an 8 out of 10. As a follow-up, similar to how we did with the 9070 XT and non-XT, we are doing a dedicated productivity review for the RX 9070 GRE as well, where we compare it against the 9070 XT, 9070, 7800 XT, as well as Nvidia's 5070 and 4070. This will include AI, rendering, compute, and more benchmarks. AI performance, especially, is a very important metric in today's world, and AMD also promised big improvements thanks to its underlying architectural improvements. We will be pitching it against the data we already have for the RX 9070, and RX 9070 XT, but also the Nvidia 5070 FE, MSI GeForce RTX 4070 VENTUS 2X 12G, and Gigabyte Radeon RX 7800 XT GAMING OC 16G as they are in a similar price class, but also because we do not have a comparable 5060 Ti card lying around here that we can compare it against. Before we get underway, this is a collaboration between Sayan Sen and Steven Parker, who lent me his test bed. Also, there was no editorial input from AMD. First up, the specs of the RX 9070, 9070 XT, and 9070 GRE, which were given to us by AMD: Radeon RX 9070 GRE Radeon RX 9070 Radeon RX 9070 XT Boost Clock: Game Clock: up to 2.79GHz up to 2.20GHz up to 2.52GHz up to 2.07GHz up to 2.97GHz up to 2.40GHz Stream Processors 3,072 (48 CU) 3,584 (56 CU) 4,096 (64 CU) Ray Accelerator 48 56 64 AI Accelerator 96 112 128 ROPs 96 128 Texture Mapping Units 192 224 256 Memory 12 GB GDDR6, 18Gbps Clock, 192-bit Bus 432 GB/s 16 GB GDDR6, 20Gbps Clock, 256-bit Bus Effective Memory Bandwidth: 640 GB/s Infinity Cache 48 MB (3rd Gen) 64 MB (3rd Gen) Card Bus PCI-E 5.0 X16 Output 2x HDMI 2.1b 2x DisplayPort 2.1a Power consumption 220W 304W Recommended PSU 650W 750W Slot width 2x 3x Price (SEP) $549 $599 As you can see from the specs above, it is less than the standard RX 9070 in every way that counts, except for slightly higher Boost and Game clock speed. Design Moving on, the RX 9070 GRE we were given is an XFX Swift triple-fan, dual-slot design with two 8-pin connectors. At 30cm (self-measured), it will fit in most systems easily. There is no RGB either. The AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE by XFX from all angles. Test system Our test system consists of the following: Lian Li O11 Dynamic Mini V2 Flow (Amazon|Newegg) ASUS Z890 ProArt Creator WiFi (Amazon|Newegg) Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus (Amazon|Newegg) Thermal Grizzly KryoSheet - 44x37 (Amazon|Newegg) 2x 16GB G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB (7200 MT/s in XMP) (Amazon|Newegg) Sabrent Rocket4 Plus 2TB SSD (Amazon) Windows 11 25H2 (Build 26200.8246) AMD shared a press driver based on the recently released Adrenaline 26.5.2 that we were required to use. We now move on to our benchmarks. First up, we have Geekbench AI running on ONNX. For some reason, the 9070 GRE does exceptionally well here in both half-precision (FP16) and single-precision (FP32). It manages to beat the RTX 5070 and RX 9070 non-XT, and is only behind the 9070 XT. Since Geekbench runs in short bursts instead of continuously hammering the graphics card, it seems the GRE's faster boost clocks are helping here. Next up, we move to the UL Procyon AI test suite, starting with the image generation benchmark. We chose the Stable Diffusion XL FP16 test since it is the most intense workload available on Procyon. The Nvidia cards do very well here, as even the 4070 out-muscles AMD's best fairy easily. The positive thing about the GRE is that it gets quite close to the 9070 non-XT in this test; this indicates that the VRAM does not play a very big role here, as SD XL relies on float16 (FP16). So this is something to keep in mind again. If you wish to work with float32 AI workloads, graphics cards with larger than 12 GB buffers would likely emerge as victors. Regardless, the gains are still massive on AMD's 9000 series compared to the 7000 series. Following image generation, we move to the text generation benchmark. This is one test where the 9070 GRE struggled, quite a lot. It seems that the 12 GB VRAM and lower memory bandwidth of the new Radeon 9070 GRE are hurting it quite a bit; the split is massive, especially in a test like Llama2, which packs 13 billion parameters. As such, in all the tests, the 9070 GRE is the slowest of the lot. Next, we tried Blender, and here the AMD GPUs were beaten by Nvidia. Rendering is something the Green team has always had a lead over the Red side, and it has not changed so far. On the positive side, though, the 9070 GRE shows significantly better results than the 7800 XT, which means AMD is on the right path. Catching up to Nvidia, though, will require a lot more effort. And we hope HIP and ROCm can keep improving. Wrapping up AI testing, we measured OpenCL throughput in the Geekbench compute benchmark. The RX 9070 GRE alongside the 9070 did not fare well here at all, even falling behind the 7800 XT. Interestingly, even the RTX 5070 could not beat the 4070 on OpenCL, so perhaps this suggests that OpenCL optimization may not have been a priority for either AMD or Nvidia in the modern era. Conclusion We reached the end of our productivity performance review of the 9070 GRE, and we have to say it's a mixed bag. Unlike the 9070 and 9070 XT, the GRE excels in some areas while losing ground fairly easily in others. Similar to how it happened in gaming, any time the card's memory subsystem gets hammered, it tends to fall behind the others. This was the case with text generation, wherein we saw the VRAM sometimes hit its maximum available 12 GB of usage with larger model sizes. So what do we make of the RX 9070 as a productivity hardware? It can certainly be used, but you have to know it has its limitations. For those looking for a GPU that can deal with more, AMD recently unveiled the Radeon AI PRO R9700, which is essentially a 32 GB refresh of the 9070 XT with some additional workstation-based optimizations. On a similar note, the new Ryzen AI Halo platform is something you can consider if you want to set up a local AI processing station. Considering everything, we rate AMD's Radeon RX 9070 GRE a 7.5 out of 10 for its productivity performance. Price is less of a factor for those looking at productivity cases compared to those considering the GPU for gaming, and as such, we felt it did quite decently on many occasions and can be handy if you need a 12 GB GPU and, for some reason, don't want to get Nvidia. Purchase links: RX 9070 / XT / GRE (Amazon US) As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Does anyone here know if these updates are integrated into the UUP dump isos?
    • Motrix Next 3.9.4 by Razvan Serea Motrix Next is a modern, open-source cross-platform download manager built as the official next-generation successor to the original Motrix project. It has been completely rewritten using Tauri 2, Vue 3, TypeScript, and Rust, while still relying on the powerful Aria2 download engine for high-speed multi-protocol transfers. The app supports HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, BitTorrent, ED2K and magnet links, offering advanced features like multi-connection acceleration, task scheduling, bandwidth control, and batch download management. With a significantly reduced install size (around 20MB), it focuses on being lightweight, fast, and resource-efficient compared to traditional Electron-based download tools. Designed for Windows, macOS, and Linux, Motrix Next delivers a clean, modern UI inspired by Material Design 3 principles, with smooth animations and a minimal workflow. It improves usability through better download organization, system tray integration, and enhanced torrent handling including selective file downloads and tracker management. Motrix Next features: Multi-protocol downloads — HTTP, FTP, BitTorrent, Magnet, .torrent, ED2K, and Metalink tasks BitTorrent — Selective file download, DHT, peer exchange, encryption controls, metadata caching, GeoIP peer flags, and tracker probing Browser extension integration — Embedded Extension API with independent authentication, download confirmation, smart auto-submit, filename hints, referer/cookie forwarding, and real-time controls (Chrome Web Store · Edge Add-ons) Safe filename handling — Content-Disposition, RFC 2047, non-UTF-8, percent-encoded, and extensionless URL resolution with path traversal sanitization Download organization — Favorite and recent folders, optional file-type categorization, stale-record cleanup, and completed history backed by SQLite Concurrent downloads — Independent controls for active tasks, HTTP connections per server, segments per file, and BT peer limits Speed control — Global and per-task upload/download limits with day-of-week and time-of-day scheduling System integration — Tray operation, optional tray speed display, macOS Dock badge/progress, protocol handlers for magnet://, thunder://, and motrixnext:// Lightweight mode — Destroys the WebView on minimize-to-tray while Rust keeps the engine, task monitor, notifications, history, and extension routing alive Notifications and power options — Native task start/complete/failure notifications, keep-awake during downloads, and optional shutdown after completion Network controls — Scoped proxy support for downloads, app updates, and tracker updates, plus system proxy detection Auto-update channels — Stable, Beta, and Latest Across Channels policies with separate download and install phases Diagnostics — Structured logs, exportable diagnostic ZIPs, database integrity checks, automatic DB rebuild, and Linux GPU rendering fallback Personalization — Light/dark/system theme, 10 color schemes, 26 languages, and first-launch system language detection Motrix Next 3.9.4 changelog: Motrix Next 3.9.4 promotes the 3.9.4 beta cycle to stable. This release refreshes bundled engine binaries, improves task detail readability and copy actions, expands link handling for magnet and ED2K workflows, polishes responsive navigation and text wrapping, updates browser extension documentation, and refines network preference controls. New Features Task Detail copy actions — Added copyable values for task metadata and reusable render functions for long text fields. Magnet and ED2K lifecycle support — Added task lifecycle handling for magnet and ED2K links. History cleanup for deleted tasks — Deleted tasks can now remove matching history records. User-Agent management — Added user-agent management and improved related network preference controls. Browser extension documentation — Added the Firefox Add-ons link for the Motrix Next extension. Improvements Engine binaries — Updated bundled binaries for supported architectures. Task Detail readability — Long task names, URLs, tracker values, and copyable metadata now render more clearly. Deletion messaging — Refined localized task deletion text for clarity and consistency. Text wrapping — Improved URI input wrapping and task name multiline display. Navigation layout — Improved sub-navigation responsiveness. Disk allocation default — Changed the default file allocation method to trunc. Proxy controls — Improved proxy button styling in network preferences. Download: Motrix Next 64-bit | ARM64 | macOS ~20.0 MB (Open Source) Links: Website | macOS / Linux | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • NVIDIA officially supports Ubuntu, as linked above with the GeForce NOW Hands on I did in collaboration with Paul Hill.
    • TO be clear I am not running linux today, however I keep thinking about it. And I want to make sure there are minimal obstacles if I decide to make that switch in the coming months.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Dedicated
      Mark Spruce earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      479
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      248
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      72
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      69
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!