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

I find it funny that installing apps is a major concern. No matter what distro you use [as far as the mainstream ones are concerned] they all have a package management system. Swaret for slackware, portage for gentoo, apt-get for debain and the newest kid ubuntu, yum, yast, urpmi for RPM based distros, , but they all have very simple and easy to use package management.

I am not here to convince anyone, I use Win2k at work, I am a Mechanical Engineer and spend 90% of my time on AutoCAD, [and 10% of my time telling contractors that it is a 4" gas pipe for a reason]. There really is no competent CAD software for linux, sorry. I use linux 99% of the time outside of work however. I do not hate Windows, I do not have strange love for Linux, I use both. But, to see someone complaining that software installation is more difficult in Linux is a farce. It takes me forever to update my installed software on Windows, namely because I have to update everything other than Windows itself and Office manually. In linux, it is just a couple simple commands and EVERYTHING is updated. Why are people so afraid of the command line, it is definitely one of the main things I miss when booted into Windows, so simple yet powerful.

KDE doesn't try to be the same as windows xp, it's the other way around  ;)

With the "Start menu" it's called kicker if you talk about kde is fully customizable diferent colour, transparency hiding etc.. you can do anything to change the kicker.

still the fact remains that it is inspired from start menu and has same functionality.

Linux doesn't need a directx replacement, linux is fast Out of the box, linux also supports 3D sound.

586201995[/snapback]

:blink: did you even try to understand what he was trying to say ? as much as you like Linux, the parent poster was trying to say something entirely different.

It takes me forever to update my installed software on Windows, namely because I have to update everything other than Windows itself and Office manually.  In linux, it is just a couple simple commands and EVERYTHING is updated.

586215821[/snapback]

Do you really expect Adobe or Autodesk or any other company will allow Microsoft to update their software ? :wacko: As much as the concept is simple, its not feasible when professional companies are involved.

Do you really expect Adobe or Autodesk or any other company will allow Microsoft to update their software ? :wacko: As much as the concept is simple, its not feasible when professional companies are involved.

586216132[/snapback]

I think it is, actually. I can update propietary stuff through portage: Maya, Doom3, vmware... as long as the company has patches available online it can be done.

Install and uninstall like OSX, just drag a icon onto the hdd and the program is automatically installed, drag to the recyc bin and the application is uninstalled.

Well for most Distros it is as simple as one or two commands, with the bonus that you don't have to even look for where to get the app, the package manager even does that for you. And of course there are GUI replacements for almost any of the CLI based package managers. Not to mention they keep every app nice and updated in one shot system wide.

Uninstallation is just as easy.

So installation on Linux isn't like it used to be back when you had to compile everything. I'm not trying to argue your opinion or anything. If you want it drag and drop like that, well that's good, but on Linux I think its just as easy.

Move the GUI KDE/Gnome onto the 3D card, like OSX. I think this is the future of GUI design is pushing the gui onto the 3D card, which should allow for lot's of cool effects/graphical representations, whilst not straining the CPU. I know this is a big option (Apologies if they (KDE / Gnome) are / have already done this)

Yeah, there are lots of cool effects you can do on GDE and KDE. As a matter of fact the transparency effects use even less resources than Win2k and XP.

Stop trying to be the same as Windows XP. It may be the most used OS on the planet, but i have never been a fan of the design since it's release, it looked plain ugly. Being a heavy computer user for a number of years i want my UI with the computer to look professional , not something from toy town.

The start menu was a good idea year ago, but it's design is starting to show it's age, when after installing a number of applications the start menu covers the screen. Yes you can put these into sub folders but it's a lot of messing about.

I can agree with you that I don't think Linux should strive to look like Windows, but I can understand why. The big problem with Linux has always been that it has been scarey to Windows ands Mac users. So if familiarity is reached from a Windows or Mac user than they are going to be a little more comfortable. The startup button is just there for familiarity. You don't have to use it or have it.

But, the most powerful thing about Linux is choice. You can have your desktop enviroment look like anything you want. People that think exactly as you do use different Windows Managers that don't look or care about what MS Windows looks like.

It would be nice for linux to have a killer app / piece of functionaility. With OSX spotlight was a good attension raiser. With longhorn 3D effects of the desktop and new Games layer (directx replacement) also look really interesting.

Ah there are a lot apps out there that are interesting. They just don't have the corporate backing and marketing that Spotlight or Longhorn has.

People in the Linux community have looked forward to things and still do. Look at ReiserFS or SELinux or the other new technologies rising in the nix/BSD open source community. There are tons.

It would be nice to have something to look forward too on the linux platform like the above, which would grab the attenion of people, although don't ask me what the killer app/functionaility could be, as i can't think of anything :(

586201767[/snapback]

Synaptic caused a big fuss. Like the windows community there are a lot of people who focus on different areas that they think are a big deal.

Do you really expect Adobe or Autodesk or any other company will allow Microsoft to update their software ? :wacko: As much as the concept is simple, its not feasible when professional companies are involved.

586216132[/snapback]

I believe its the other way around. Either case, it really doesn't hold water to say that a 'professional' (as if Linux/BSD companies aren't) companies wouldn't allow the OS maker to give the companies the bandwidth and space with a central location for all their update deployments. That would be crazy that most companies wouldn't jump at that chance.

It would save them money across the board. The most being in Support costs, which is why the updates are primarily there in the first place for. Do you really think that there is no such think as a corporation in the Linux community? Do you think that there is no proprietary software in the Linux community? Because if you do not think so, then you would be wrong.

Edited by dotRoot

I use both linux and windows both at work and at home. But lets not kid ourselves, most of the world's computer users and even developers have only ever used windows and may have not even heard of linux. Linux is a great community effort but it will not even begin to compete with Microsoft's windows until it gets some commercial support. Almost all apps are free but are not always as good as commercial or even free apps available for windows. The gui in linux has come a long way but it is all immitation. One exucse people have is saying that "windows had too many viruses and is insecure". This maybe true but mainly for the average user who doesnt even know what a firewall is. If you have any basic knowledge of the OS you would understand how to avoid such things that will probably become an issue later for linux when the virus writers become interested in writing viruses and worms for linux. Some may claim that the linux community is "growing fast", it may only appear to be that since most users cant depend on linux solely to get by and they have to dual boot with windows whether for gaming, or using any software that is rarely available on linux (Adobe photoshop and many others) and please dont tell me GIMP is just as good. The linux community is very active on the internet thus giving the illusion of a big size but it is nothing close to the windows community. To prove my point just go out to any street and ask a sizeable sample of people which OS they use and you will find that most people will say "What is Linux?". I like both windows and linux and use both.

I use both linux and windows both at work and at home. But lets not kid ourselves, most of the world's computer users and even developers have only ever used windows and may have not even heard of linux. Linux is a great community effort but it will not even begin to compete with Microsoft's windows until it gets some commercial support. Almost all apps are free but are not always as good as commercial or even free apps available for windows. The gui in linux has come a long way but it is all immitation. One exucse people have is saying that "windows had too many viruses and is insecure". This maybe true but mainly for the average user who doesnt even know what a firewall is. If you have any basic knowledge of the OS you would understand how to avoid such things that will probably become an issue later for linux when the virus writers become interested in writing viruses and worms for linux. Some may claim that the linux community is "growing fast", it may only appear to be that since most users cant depend on linux solely to get by and they have to dual boot with windows whether for gaming, or using any software that is rarely available on linux (Adobe photoshop and many others) and please dont tell me GIMP is just as good. The linux community is very active on the internet thus giving the illusion of a big size but it is nothing close to the windows community. To prove my point just go out to any street and ask a sizeable sample of people which OS they use and you will find that most people will say "What is Linux?". I like both windows and linux and use both.

586238726[/snapback]

Check this out, seeplusplus

I agree with you, however ;)

Well, I believe Windows has the basic flaws that make it more of a target for hackers and malware dispensers. Look at all of the patches and security fixes for Windows. I just took a random polling of folks here. No one has posted that they got a virus or spyware on Linux.......

Barney

i would happily use linux as my main desktop if my programs came with me some have linux versions but then theres the big on GAMES no steam games in linux and cod and stuuf like that which i play sometimes and dont want to reboot just to play, also ati if they improved the driver support

Linux is a great community effort but it will not even begin to compete with Microsoft's windows until it gets some commercial support.

It already does take a chunk of the market share from windows on the webserver front and a smaller, but still good chunk from 'other' servers. And it does have commercial support. Look at Novell and RedHat. Both are big companies, both support the Linux community.

Almost all apps are free but are not always as good as commercial or even free apps available for windows.

You mean Apache isn't better than IIS? Is that why Apache is used by around 80% of the webservers, even for Windows boxes now, because IIS really is crap. I'm not saying Windows is crap...just IIS.

What about Samba? It does a better job networking in my opinion. Because its faster, doesn't go mad sometimes if the 'Master Browser' on the network suddenly crashes and it'll talk to Apple fine as well.

One exucse people have is saying that "windows had too many viruses and is insecure". This maybe true but mainly for the average user who doesnt even know what a firewall is. If you have any basic knowledge of the OS you would understand how to avoid such things that will probably become an issue later for linux when the virus writers become interested in writing viruses and worms for linux.

So there isn't ONE virus writer in the world wanting to make a virus/worm/trojan to take down or over the majority of webservers out there? They don't do it, because it is almost pointless. The permissions and setups default with most distros just out-right make it not worth writing a virus for. The chances for it to damage anything important in the OS, even documents or database entries is pretty slim. Someone would have to log in as Root. Change permissions for everything to at least 755 on the system and THEN run the virus. As for security in general. Look at qmail. One of the top dogs in Mail Transport Agents. There's been a $5,000 reward for someone to find only ONE exploit in qmail. Just one. Its been going on for a long time and yet nobody has apparently found one.

The market share arguement is bogus, because Linux does indeed have a good market share in good markets.

Some may claim that the linux community is "growing fast", it may only appear to be that since most users cant depend on linux solely to get by and they have to dual boot with windows whether for gaming,

There isn't much arguement there about gaming, although some hardcore gamers still use solely Linux. They'll use TransGaming's application more than likely. I mean it does offer good support of Windows games. It even supported Half-life 2 the first day it came out.

or using any software that is rarely available on linux (Adobe photoshop and many others) and please dont tell me GIMP is just as good.

A misconception against the GIMP and Photoshop. Nobody thinks the GIMP is as good as Photoshop. The GIMP isn't meant to be. Its good for what most people 'average' use Photoshop for on the PC.

And by the way. Crossover Office runs Photoshop fine in Linux.

The linux community is very active on the internet thus giving the illusion of a big size but it is nothing close to the windows community. To prove my point just go out to any street and ask a sizeable sample of people which OS they use and you will find that most people will say "What is Linux?". I like both windows and linux and use both.

586238726[/snapback]

Nobody ever says it is close to the size of the Windows community. I don't know any Linux user that even thinks so. But, just because more people use it doesn't make it better. Also, I'm not saying that Linux is better than Windows. But to Linux users obviously Linux is better. For Windows users that are familiar with Linux, than obviously Windows is better. There are no arguements there. Linux is around for choice, that's it. That's what the GPL and Linux is all about.

Edited by dotRoot
It already does take a chunk of the market share from windows on the webserver front and a smaller, but still good chunk from 'other' servers. And it does have commercial support. Look at Novell and RedHat. Both are big companies, both support the Linux community.

You mean Apache isn't better than IIS? Is that why Apache is used by around 80% of the webservers, even for Windows boxes now, because IIS really is crap. I'm not saying Windows is crap...just IIS.

What about Samba? It does a better job networking in my opinion. Because its faster, doesn't go mad sometimes if the 'Master Browser' on the network suddenly crashes and it'll talk to Apple fine as well.

So there isn't ONE virus writer in the world wanting to make a virus/worm/trojan to take down or over the majority of webservers out there? They don't do it, because it is almost pointless. The permissions and setups default with most distros just out-right make it not worth writing a virus for. The chances for it to damage anything important in the OS, even documents or database entries is pretty slim. Someone would have to log in as Root. Change permissions for everything to at least 755 on the system and THEN run the virus. As for security in general. Look at qmail. One of the top dogs in Mail Transport Agents. There's been a $5,000 reward for someone to find only ONE exploit in qmail. Just one. Its been going on for a long time and yet nobody has apparently found one.

The market share arguement is bogus, because Linux does indeed have a good market share in good markets.

There isn't much arguement there about gaming, although some hardcore gamers still use solely Linux. They'll use TransGaming's application more than likely. I mean it does offer good support of Windows games. It even supported Half-life 2 the first day it came out.

A misconception against the GIMP and Photoshop. Nobody thinks the GIMP is as good as Photoshop. The GIMP isn't meant to be. Its good for what most people 'average' use Photoshop for on the PC.

And by the way. Crossover Office runs Photoshop fine in Linux.

Nobody ever says it is close to the size of the Windows community. I don't know any Linux user that even thinks so. But, just because more people use it doesn't make it better. Also, I'm not saying that Linux is better than Windows. But to Linux users obviously Linux is better. For Windows users that are familiar with Linux, than obviously Windows is better. There are no arguements there. Linux is around for choice, that's it. That's what the GPL and Linux is all about.

586242547[/snapback]

Thanks for the reply. You make some very good arguments.

Linux is actually taking more off of Sun microsystem's plate in the server market.

Apache is better than IIS, but if you look at some of the large domains that rely on IIS, most of those who have experienced administrators working can run it fine and even better than apache, ex: hotmail.com, bell.ca, microsoft.com...etc. IIS is only bad if the administration team is not experienced.

(Im gonna write less this time... sorry).

I have tried Crossover, how many times does the app crash during one session??

I am totally pro GPL and opensource but this is a capitalist society!!

(Please note the attempt at using paragraphs :p )

Apache is better than IIS, but if you look at some of the large domains that rely on IIS, most of those who have experienced administrators working can run it fine and even better than apache, ex: hotmail.com, bell.ca, microsoft.com...etc. IIS is only bad if the administration team is not experienced. 

hotmail.com, microsoft.com have a direct interest in the wellfare of IIS so you can hardly use those as an example.

I am totally pro GPL and opensource but this is a capitalist society!!

GPLed software stops the forming of monopolies, its EULAs that are anti-capitalist.

hotmail.com, microsoft.com have a direct interest in the wellfare of IIS so you can hardly use those as an example.

GPLed software stops the forming of monopolies, its EULAs that are anti-capitalist.

586244645[/snapback]

I understand your point but I was trying to show that the domains are very stable and complex even with IIS.

Did you know that it is technically "illegal" for a linux user to play DVDs (I mean someone running linux and probably playing the DVD with mplayer or xine). Thats what I mean by "capitalist" they want you to pay money to use the standards. Redhat and SuSE (now Novell) cutout all the mpeg related libraries so you have to download and install them now seperately. They will not package it.

Anyway Im not an expert so thanks for being patient with me everyone. :)

Did you know that it is technically "illegal" for a linux user to play DVDs (I mean someone running linux and probably playing the DVD with mplayer or xine).

586245350[/snapback]

Not illegal in Norway, for sure. "DVD" Jon Johansen won his first court case, and the second (appeal) one, too. The verdict is no longer appealed, so it is, by court decision, legal to use DeCSS to play DVDs in Norway. (reference)

It has not been tried in any court (to my knowledge) in any other country. So, it seems to have an excellent prospect to fall under "fair use" in other countries. It may be legally gray or unclear, but it is not necessarily correct to say "illegal".

I understand your point but I was trying to show that the domains are very stable and complex even with IIS.

No one said they couldn't, we said they shouldn't ;)

Did you know that it is technically "illegal" for a linux user to play DVDs (I mean someone running linux and probably playing the DVD with mplayer or xine). Thats what I mean by "capitalist" they want you to pay money to use the standards. Redhat and SuSE (now Novell) cutout all the mpeg related libraries so you have to download and install them now seperately. They will not package it.

586245350[/snapback]

Government-imposed regulation isn't capitalism either. They are, in fact, the exact opposite.

http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

Well, I believe Windows has the basic flaws that make it more of a target for hackers and malware dispensers. Look at all of the patches and security fixes for Windows. I just took a random polling of folks here. No one has posted that they got a virus or spyware on Linux.......

Barney

586241915[/snapback]

What are these 'basic flaws' you're talking about? Specifics, please...

Don't kid yourself - that is the age old "Security through obscurity" argument. The fact is that the ONLY reason you don't have virii on Linux is because, frankly, no one uses it - Virus writers do what they do for one main reason... recognition. Why should they target a minute portion of users when they can target the vast bulk of users and get more bang for their efforts?

Software that does not have a steady stream of patches and bug fixes is NOT secure - in fact, it is likely to be more INSECURE. Consider Firefox... no bug fixes when it was a sideline hack not in general use. When it started being used by the masses the bug reports and fixes for Firefox were 8x what they were for IE over the same time period, often fixing problems that had been reported for IE months earlier.

What are these 'basic flaws' you're talking about? Specifics, please...

Don't kid yourself - that is the age old "Security through obscurity" argument. The fact is that the ONLY reason you don't have virii on Linux is because, frankly, no one uses it - Virus writers do what they do for one main reason... recognition. Why should they target a minute portion of users when they can target the vast bulk of users and get more bang for their efforts?

Software that does not have a steady stream of patches and bug fixes is NOT secure - in fact, it is likely to be more INSECURE.  Consider Firefox... no bug fixes when it was a sideline hack not in general use. When it started being used by the masses the bug reports and fixes for Firefox were 8x what they were for IE over the same time period, often fixing problems that had been reported for IE months earlier.

586246154[/snapback]

:blink: :sleep: :sleep:

What are these 'basic flaws' you're talking about? Specifics, please...

Users own binaries.

users are encouraged to run as administrator.

ports are haphazardly left open.

all the code is hidden and not audited by third-parties.

binary-only programs are extremely common so viruses have a lot of places to hide.

these binary programs are usually statically compiled (to avoid dll hell) but if a common library (such as libpng) has a security hole, all the programs have to be updated.

Package management (if you could call it that) in Windows is decenteralized so users must hunt over the internet for programs, this makes phishing extremely easy. You won't find viruses or spyware in a GNU/Linux distribution repositories.

Virus writers do what they do for one main reason... recognition.

The first severe linux virus outbreak sounds like it could make news to me. Guys like dvorak would love it.

Software that does not have a steady stream of patches and bug fixes is NOT secure - in fact, it is likely to be more INSECURE.  Consider Firefox... no bug fixes when it was a sideline hack not in general use.

The masses don't report bugs (just take a look at bugzilla's interface) or 99% of the bug reports would be "Firefox thing crashed, fix it". Firefox had more bug fixes because more third parties were looking over the code and the complexity of Firefox had greatly risen over the same period.

When it started being used by the masses the bug reports and fixes for Firefox were 8x what they were for IE over the same time period

Then by your definition, it should be more secure ;) Considering Firefox has never had a extremely critical security alert, while IE still has 20 out of their 83 security alerts unpatched (not to mention 30% of those 83 security alerts being extremely critical).

often fixing problems that had been reported for IE months earlier.

IE != Firefox. They do not have the same bugs.

Users own binaries.

users are encouraged to run as administrator.

ports are haphazardly left open.

all the code is hidden and not audited by third-parties.

binary-only programs are extremely common so viruses have a lot of places to hide.

these binary programs are usually statically compiled (to avoid dll hell) but if a common library (such as libpng) has a security hole, all the programs have to be updated.

Package management (if you could call it that) in Windows is decenteralized so users must hunt over the internet for programs, this makes phishing extremely easy. You won't find viruses or spyware in a GNU/Linux distribution repositories.

The first severe linux virus outbreak sounds like it could make news to me. Guys like dvorak would love it.

The masses don't report bugs (just take a look at bugzilla's interface) or 99% of the bug reports would be "Firefox thing crashed, fix it". Firefox had more bug fixes because more third parties were looking over the code and the complexity of Firefox had greatly risen over the same period.

Then by your definition, it should be more secure ;) Considering Firefox has never had a extremely critical security alert, while IE still has 20 out of their 83 security alerts unpatched (not to mention 30% of those 83 security alerts being extremely critical).

IE != Firefox. They do not have the same bugs.

586246223[/snapback]

nice quality post, congratulations (Y)

The first severe linux virus outbreak sounds like it could make news to me. Guys like dvorak would love it.

586246223[/snapback]

True. The first moron that releases a linux virus that's able to spread massively will set a milestone no windows' virus coder would be able to achieve.

And as I've stated earlier Linux does have a very good chunk in the marketshare of webservers and a not-so-big, but ok share in 'other' servers. There is no way someone can argue its because 'nobody' uses it, when more websites are hosted on Linux boxes. That does not mean there are more linux servers mind you, just more virtually hosted ones.

What about SELinux where there isn't even a concept of a SuperUser/Root and you have to explicitely tell each file what other file they can even access? Is that not more than Windows without any arguement (not as flexible for the average person of course)?

My next question is. Again. Why would not ONE person not have written a virus for any Nix/BSD kernel/OS? Because they'd take down a lot of the internet if it spread. So why not again? How come no Windows users that use the marketshare arguement never reply to this question?

Remember, Windows guys, we aren't here to even argue which is better than what. We don't come to your boards every other week or so and post anything like this. This is a thread about "Is Linux Nearing Windows XP Usability?". In otherwords: Can the average joe use Linux. Not a "mine is better than your's" thread. We have enough of those here already.

And as I've stated earlier Linux does have a very good chunk in the marketshare of webservers and a not-so-big, but ok share in 'other' servers. There is no way someone can argue its because 'nobody' uses it, when more websites are hosted on Linux boxes. That does not mean there are more linux servers mind you, just more virtually hosted ones.

What about SELinux where there isn't even a concept of a SuperUser/Root and you have to explicitely tell each file what other file they can even access? Is that not more than Windows without any arguement (not as flexible for the average person of course)?

My next question is. Again. Why would not ONE person not have written a virus for any Nix/BSD kernel/OS? Because they'd take down a lot of the internet if it spread. So why not again? How come no Windows users that use the marketshare arguement never reply to this question?

Remember, Windows guys, we aren't here to even argue which is better than what. We don't come to your boards every other week or so and post anything like this. This is a thread about "Is Linux Nearing Windows XP Usability?". In otherwords: Can the average joe use Linux. Not a "mine is better than your's" thread. We have enough of those here already.

586247112[/snapback]

I agree, I want to add something to this,

Linux is only the Kernel so we are comparing a Kernel to a complete Operating System so it is comparing apples with oranges.

I can only say is the averenge Joe Doe ready for Linux?

With Linux you'll need to have a pretty good computer knowledge.

But what I think, I think Linux is more then ready.

BTW I talk about the Kernel.

I've been stewing over this thread for a while now, and I think I'll reply this time.

Mr_demilord, I think it's been established that, when people refer to "Linux", especially in this thread, they mean the operating system. Yes, if you want to be pedantic, it is the kernel. But let's be realistic here. If you were talking about the kernel, then half of your post is redundant. That said, it does imply that Linux is so customisable that it is quite difficult to compare it to Windows, given that there is no one "standard" Linux system. You can have a basic system set up with no GUI, or with XFree86, or with X.org, and you could run KDE, Gnome, *box, enlightenment, or a number of other window managers/desktop environments. More than one on a system and, indeed, even multiple instances of them at the same time.

So, it all comes down to this: how do you measure usability? Is it merely where buttons and other widgets are located, or how easy it is to read the text in a window? Or is it how easy it is to get the system to perform some complex task? How easy it is to manipulate it?

Linux can be inconsistent at times, but it is usually nothing that ten minutes to half an hour (or a different program) can't teach you. That said, Linux can also be very consistent. It all depends on your choices, and how you want your system to be. In my experience, Windows usually does relatively well in the UI consistency department, but things can be quite cryptic and hard to find (and there are a few common programs that decide to go off on a complete UI tangent).

But for me, the command line is one of my most loved possessions. If I had to use a GUI for everything, how many clicks would it take before I could get a program to list all of the directories in a given directory which comtain over 5 MB, but whose name doesn't have "gcc" in it?

But usability is an extremely subjective thing. For a novice, the usability of a system might be simply being able to launch the web browser before lunch hour's up without worrying about whether clicking the blue thing will delete the harddrive. For someone a little more advanced, it might be all that and being able to find and modify certain settings. For someone like me, it means being able to make my system do what I want, when I want, with as much risk as I am willing to take at any time.

In that respect, Windows, in its current state, will never, ever be as usable to me as Linux is. In Windows, what can I do? I can install programs, I can use said programs, I can change a few settings, and I can reboot the computer. In Linux, I can do anything I want to the system. There is nothing stopping me from experimenting with, and learning about, the computer and what makes it run (and subsequently screwing it up beyond all repair), and that's exactly the way I like it. Windows just isn't at all usable in that kind of way. Every time I boot into Windows and try to get something done, it feels like I'm hiking up a mountain with a ball and chain hooked onto my foot while making friends with a boa constrictor.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Or just check the script yourself ^^. I hate having a Microsoft account tied to my windows install.
    • 007 First Light review: Satisfying spy adventure that James Bond needed by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe I have fond memories of classic James Bond games from the Electronic Arts era. Using high-tech gadgets, sneaking into parties, and dispatching bad guys were wildly exciting activities for my younger self. In recent years, Bond games have entirely disappeared, alongside the super spy genre. Fast forward to 2020, imagine my surprise when IO Interactive announced it had secured the Bond IP to make a game. Considering the studio’s Hitman history, this project is one I keenly kept an eye on. Six years later, 007 First Light is finally here, and after spending time inside this globe-trotting adventure, I can safely say that my excitement for this developer’s take on this universe was not unfounded. IO has taken lessons it has learned from Hitman and combined them with what I would expect from a directed cinematic experience like James Bond. I have refrained from mentioning major plot points to save you from story spoilers in this review. This is an original story that doesn’t tie into any movies, so there isn’t an expectation of knowing the backstory or the decades of movies either. Bond, James Bond When 007 First Light begins, Bond is just Bond. There isn’t a spy angle, fancy gadgets, or even a secret mission. The introductory mission is framed to show how James Bond handled himself and how he does not care about the odds when it comes to saving lives. It’s a gorgeous level as well, showing off an island scattered with cliffs in the middle of a storm. Looking back, this is probably the best-looking level in the game, with IO showing off all its abilities with its custom engine, Glacier. But my favorite ended up being the follow-up to this level. Once the United Kingdom's foreign intelligence agency, MI6, recruits our daring youngster into its super-spy “00” program, training begins. However, instead of treading through the same tutorial missions where the game teaches you to run and jump and drive, IO opted for a montage, and it’s amazing. The scenes cut between Bond practicing and improving his marksmanship, parkour, hand-to-hand combat, and driving as weeks go by in his training. What impressed me here was the lack of any loading screens or stutters as scenes instantly switched to different locations entirely, as if I was watching a movie. This creativity is a trend I noticed in most levels, where there is some sort of gameplay or choreography mechanic being introduced to keep things interesting. Soon, the rest of the cast is introduced, bringing other agents that our favorite secret agent will be working with, the scientists and engineers that build MI6’s spy gadgets, as well as higher-ranking officers that either appreciate or (at best) tolerate Bond’s rebellious attitude. It’s a tight cast, all with incredibly good voice acting and personalities that quickly grew on me. The casting for Bond himself is also an excellent one. From showing his iconic soft spot for women to the condescending smiles that get a rise out of enemies, I had no issues getting immersed into this universe as this new face of James Bond. The missions take place in a wide range of locations as MI6 sends Bond to tackle dangers that are growing everywhere from the UK to Africa. These aren’t unrelated adventures where MI6 is sending secret agents, which is an angle I would love to see in another game, but a part of a bigger conspiracy affecting the entire world. Some of the twists and turns were all too predictable, and the character that Lenny Kravitz played made me cringe a little too much. But all in all, I enjoyed the campaign’s storyline that sets the stage for this new agent joining the illustrious “00” program. Plenty of Possibilities The third-person style of IO Interactive fits this role quite well. Bond is presented as a master at hand-to-hand combat as well as firearms, while also having a knack for being stealthy when required. Most sections of missions have a lot of freedom. This means I could beat up every goon and security guard on the way to an objective, slip past them without sounding a single alarm, or do a mix of both. My sessions usually end up with the third option because I tend to be impatient about waiting for a patrol to move. Drawing from its Hitman genes, the developer almost always gives multiple routes for going through missions. Levels can be massive, sometimes sporting hundreds of NPCs going their own ways and having conversations. If my objective is to break into a security room on the third floor, I could look around for roof access, eavesdrop on conversations to find out where someone lost a key, create a distraction and pickpocket a guard for a keycard, sneak in through the vents, or simply kick down the offending door. I enjoyed the variety on offer, especially because the same solutions didn’t usually show up in different missions. Before heading out into a secret MI6 escapade, the gadget specialist of the branch walks Bond through the organization's latest and greatest achievements. This can be cool little devices like a laser built into the watch, a phone that fires poison darts, or a camera that emits a powerful shockwave. The choice of what can be taken into the mission is up to the player. I could usually find fresh routes or get out of tough situations with a punch or two, so I never had the feeling of missing out by not choosing the right equipment. It’s still a fun practice. Choosing the armaments before a mission enhanced the super spy feeling quite a bit. As I mentioned, stealth comes in as a very viable option for most of the missions, letting Bond sneak past foes or knock them out silently. While it is satisfying to clear entire areas of goons and walk away without any alarms, the way of accomplishing this could have been done better. Bond can lure enemies, sneak up and knock them out, or use a gadget to disorient them before dealing a nasty blow. Bodies cannot be moved or hidden afterward either. It’s a very simple system, which I wish were more exciting to pull off. Perhaps more stealth-orientated gadgets, distraction options, or multi-takedowns could have helped here, I think. Getting caught while attempting to be in stealth does not mean a game over. Other than getting into a fist fight, an interesting twist of 007 First Light is the bluffing option. While an enemy is confused as to what you are doing in a restricted location, Bond has the option to improvise and persuade them that you are exactly where you’re supposed to be. These are fun little dynamic interactions with unique dialog depending on the mission and location, giving a few extra moments for Bond to go past suspicious guards smoothly. It’s the first time I’ve witnessed this system in a game, and I hope to see more. License to Kill Bond isn’t just dealing with security guards or civilians. From time to time, entire gangs of gun-toting mercenaries show up in levels looking to take down our protagonist. It is then that License to Kill mode is activated for Bond, letting him use firearms with no restrictions. I was surprised by just how tight gunplay is in 007 First Light. The weapons feel powerful and satisfying to fire, with single bullets capable of taking down an enemy with a headshot. Ammo is scarce, and enemies don’t drop weapons with full magazines most of the time. This forces a hectic kind of gameplay where I am always advancing towards enemies to take their weapons after they are downed. Things like shooting legs to immobilize, aiming at the hands to make their weapon go flying, blowing up nearby fire extinguishers for cover, and using gadgets to halt a goon in their tracks while I reload, make up enjoyable levels. I had to hold back my disappointment when the enemy count in these action sequences dropped to zero and I had to go non-lethal again. Speaking of action sequences, First Light isn’t just offering sandbox levels to complete at the player’s own leisure either. Each level comes with specific linear and directed scenes to move the story forward and put Bond in tight situations. These usually end up with high-octane chases or driving sections, offering the chance to witness chaining explosions, hails of gunfire, and scripted parkour scenes that remind me of Mission Impossible movies more than Bond. Elements like seeing James Bond jump out of a plane without a parachute or drive through buildings in London inside a trash truck were fantastic and always left me at a high point when finishing a mission. The classic James Bond theme is sprinkled in here too, which only happens a handful of times in the game, but at just the right moments. Visuals and Performance Compared to Unreal Engine 5 games we are seeing nowadays, 007 First Light isn’t flexing a huge amount of realism when it comes to graphics. The models, textures, and effects all feel a little dated, with the starting mission that I mentioned being the most visually striking. However, the complete lack of stutters, the hundreds of NPCs that can be on screen without a single hitch, massive sandbox levels, and smooth transitions between them all play a part in making this an immensely immersive and complex experience. The in-engine cutscenes are gorgeous as well, offering an upgraded visual style and model detail over the gameplay sections. Animations are one aspect that jumps out at me about any new game, and First Light has nailed what a third-person action game should feel like. Walking, sneaking, and running all have a heaviness to them that I appreciate. Whenever Bond moves past a wall or a ledge, his arms reach out to lightly hold those structures until he moves away. NPCs actually react to my character and move out of the way. Even during melee combat or takedown animations, the fists impacting a body or a head hitting a wall all have that same weight. Even the more frivolous animations, like catching a gun in midair or chucking an empty one at a goon (yes, you can do that), are satisfying to pull off. Of course, the in-engine cutscene animations are remarkably well done too, with facial animations and the upgraded model details improving my engagement with the characters. I have an AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT 16GB paired with an eight-core Ryzen 7 3700X and 32GB of RAM, with the game running at 1440p resolution. Deciding to completely max out all the graphics options gave me a range of frame rates between 60 and 100 depending on the scene and level. While I did try to enable AMD FSR, which bumped up the frame rates by a good 20% at Quality mode, IO Interactive’s implementation of the technology wasn’t that great. Every corner and edge in levels began shimmering, and I was also seeing smearing issues in fast-moving sections. The title seemingly uses the older generation FSR 3.1 and not the machine learning-assisted FSR 4, leading to these artifacts. Unfortunately, there isn't a way to manually upgrade this right now either. I opted to turn off the upscaling and play the game in native 1440p to avoid problems. I would say the FPS range I was getting was an acceptable one for a single-player action game for my setup. I do wish there were an FOV slider option in the settings. While the camera is far enough back for my tastes in most situations in this third-person adventure, at times the perspective is far too close. When trying to look around quickly and spot targets, I realized I was getting a slight headache at times due to the use of an almost over-the-shoulder close-up camera. Conclusion Being James Bond in 007 First Light is a treat. Traveling around the world chasing conspiracies, using high-tech gadgets disguised as everyday accessories, and improvising on the spot to fool foes all give a fantastic feeling of being a super spy. For an origin story, IO Interactive has done a great job at introducing the character and his motives for doing what he does. The satisfying combat animation and fantastic voice acting are definitely high points, with the License to Kill moments being my favorite. Not being able to move bodies and the simplistic stealth of mechanics does hurt its presentation a little. The NPC logic and intelligence is easy to manipulate and trick, repeating the same actions over and over again if I keep making distractions. The lack of an FOV slider was also a pain (quite literally) at times, and the FSR implementation is quite poor. These are things I hope the studio will improve upon with updates. Even with its faults, IO Interactive and James Bond are a match made in heaven. The studio knows how to make a main character that oozes charm and competency while also leaning heavily into its Hitman experience to make gigantic levels with what looks like hundreds of NPCs roaming around. Being an origin story, IO’s Bond has a way to go before he becomes the highly effective agent we see in the movie world. I am hoping the studio will continue this series alongside its Hitman ventures going forward, just so we get to experience the journey for longer. 007 First Light is available on PC (Steam, Epic Games Store, and Xbox PC), Xbox Series X|S, and PlayStation 5 for $69.99. This review was conducted on the PC version of the game provided by IO Interactive.
    • [Price Drop] PDF Expert for Mac v3 is still half off by Steven Parker Today's highlighted deal comes via our Apps + Software section of the Neowin Deals store, where for only a limited time you can save 42% on PDF Expert One-Time Purchase. PDFs remain the best way to transmit documents, but editing them isn't possible with standard Mac software. PDF Expert changes that, allowing you to edit PDF text, images, links, and outlines quickly and easily. Typo in a contract? Easy fix. Need to rework a complete section of a document? No problem. PDF Expert provides a series of essential functions that will transform the way you work with documents on your Mac. It recognizes text and OCR, makes edits, and fills out forms. And with the “Enhance” feature powered by AI, it will fix distortions, remove shadows and improve contrast so that even difficult-to-read documents look great. EDIT Change the text. Easily fix typos, update numbers, or add entire paragraphs Insert images. Update logos in a contract or add a new graph to a report Add links. Enrich your PDFs by linking to other pages or external websites ANNOTATE Highlight the important. Make the most valuable content stand out at a glance Comment on PDFs. Add text to PDFs, insert pop-up notes & write your thoughts in the margins Add stamps. Review documents with our set of stamps or create custom stamps for any workflow ORGANIZE Merge PDFs. Combine multiple files into one PDF document Manage pages. Add, delete, rearrange, or rotate PDF pages with ease Split PDFs. Extract pages from PDFs & save them as separate files CONVERT Convert to PDF. Turn JPG, PNG, Word, PPT, and Excel to PDF PDF to Word. Convert PDFs into editable Word documents PDF to image. Turn PDFs into JPG or PNG images PDF to Excel. Convert PDFs into Excel spreadsheets PDF to PPT. Save PDFs as PowerPoint presentations PDF to text. Convert PDFs into editable TXT files FILL OUT Fill out PDF forms. Easily fill out PDF forms by just clicking on them Sign documents. Add your signature to a PDF in a few clicks. Let customers sign documents with handy one-time signatures Redact PDFs. Blackout or erase confidential information from your documents RECOGNIZE TEXT OCR text in PDF. Recognize the text, so you can search, highlight & copy it Enhance scans. Fix distortions, remove shadows & improve contrast Crop & split pages. Split double-page scans into separate pages & remove undesired margins Good to know: Length of access: Lifetime Redemption deadline: redeem your code within 30 days of purchase Access options: Mac Max number of device(s): Unlimited usage on personal macOS devices Version: PDF Expert 3 for Mac (macOS) Updates: Get continuous support and bug fixes. Additional new features may come at an extra cost. PDF Expert One-Time Purchase normally costs $139.99, but you can pick it up for just $69.97 for a limited time, that represents a saving of $70 (50% off). For a full description, specs, and license info, click the link below. Deal Price One time cost now only $69.97 (was $139.99) Although priced in U.S. dollars, this deal is available for digital purchase worldwide. Support queries If you have queries or need support for any of the Neowin Deals, please use the contact form here. Neowin Deals are managed and sold by StackCommerce who represent Neowin on an affiliate basis. We post these because we earn commission on each sale so as not to rely solely on advertising, which many of our readers block. It all helps toward paying staff reporters, servers and hosting costs. Other ways to support Neowin Whitelist Neowin by not blocking our ads Create a free member account to see fewer ads Make a donation to support our day to day running costs Subscribe to Neowin - for $14 a year, or $28 a year for an ad-free experience Disclosure: Neowin benefits from revenue of each sale made through our branded deals site powered by StackCommerce.
    • Indeed - drives me mad - usually because Refresh is hidden in the full menu.
    • Firefox has had rounded corners for many years. I take it you're not a fan of modern browsers?
  • Recent Achievements

    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • Rising Star
      olavinto went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • One Month Later
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Reacting Well
      X-No-file earned a badge
      Reacting Well
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      271
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      75
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      75
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!