Would you switch to Linux?

By Scraggles
in Poll Station

 Share

Would you switch to Linux? (Why?)  

260 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you switch to Linux? (Why?)

    • Definitely not!
      73
    • Definitely, if a few changes were made.
      39
    • Maybe if a few changes were made.
      81
    • I'm already a linux user.
      67

Recommended Posts

Mentor

linked

Posted
Posted

I had Ubuntu running for a while, but it just didn't do it for me-- I think it was the mouse, to be honest. It felt... sticky, no matter how much I configured it.

Plus, when I tried switching to Gentoo, I had trouble installing Grub and the network drivers, so I was offline, stuck in a commandline with no way to boot back into windows. When I reconfigured grub, it screwed up NTLDR (NT Loader), so I couldn't get back into windows and had to format.

Veteran

g-n-t

Posted
Posted
there is a great irony to it.  :D

Unforunately, when computing is controled by boys from the 60's who want to keep their hold on it there is not much else to do!

As I said, for practicality I prefer OS X -> that does not mean I fully endorse it (it is just the better of the bunch available)

585553367[/snapback]

then get OS9 :rolleyes:

Grand Master

AppleDave Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

I tried to install Ubuntu about 2 weeks ago and when I did it erased by MBR and some of my hard drive. In conclusion I ended up having to take it into best buy and get a new hard drive put in, but it was on warranty. The bad part is I had to put everything back on my computer, and I didnt have a backup drive or cd.

No to Linux for me.

Veteran

g-n-t

Posted
Posted
I don't understand why some people don't trust open source, is there any truth to not trusting it or is it just all in their minds?

585555773[/snapback]

i dont think its in their "minds."

i mean, with open source the source code is RIGHT THERE to look through if you dont trust it. personally, i dont trust propriety software. there is a reason all you windows users are running a software firewall as well as your hardware one.

Veteran

hyperactive

Posted
Posted
i dont think its in their "minds."

i mean, with open source the source code is RIGHT THERE to look through if you dont trust it. personally, i dont trust propriety software. there is a reason all you windows users are running a software firewall as well as your hardware one.

585555791[/snapback]

plus: it is great to be able to optimize/customize the os to your needs.

I am all for open source (although my programming days are long behind me)

I just do not like linux. It is one of those great for geeks, great in the lab, but not ready for prime-time things. It is safer for non-technical people to run the dreaded windows than linux.

Proficient

kl33per

Posted
Posted
...there is a reason all you windows users are running a software firewall as well as your hardware one.

585555791[/snapback]

I don't run a software firewall and I'm a windows user.

The main problem with Linux is that it's not easy to use. Sure, KDE and Gnome make it easier, but what happens when you hit a roadblock. Ubuntu is a great example, it can make your Windows installation unaccessible. The AMD64 version doesn't even install on my computer (which is an AMD64), because there is no driver for my card (ATi Radeon X800XTPE, and the VGA driver doesn't work). The AMD64 version also didn't detect my Windows installation.

Now some of this isn't Ubuntu's fault, but when I was left at the command prompt of Linux, with little experience, no GUI (Gnome errored quite spectacularly due to no driver support for my card), and unable to get back into Windows, I was a little anoyed.

It's to much for the average windows user, and even though I eventually got it running, it was a major pain in the ass. A typical Windows user would have given up long ago. And don't even get me started on installing packages, you Linux guys need to settle on RPM or Debian and stick with it.

Veteran

g-n-t

Posted
Posted

you just had a bad experience with a distro that isnt quite there yet.

new users shouldnt start with ubuntu. get fedora/mandrake/suse. they set everything up for you and quite frankly, easier to get working than windows is. the main problem with linux is that youve never used it before, and thereso nly one way to change that.

Mentor

mr_daemon

Posted
Posted

I am already a 100% Linux user. I maintain a winxp partition to play HL2, but it is exclusively for that -- it has a GPO that prevents me from doing anything besides play games ;)

I am pretty satisfied with my operating system, it does everything I need, and even things I don't need. (And I can choose not to install these if I want. I love the choice).

Proficient

Narlzac85

Posted
Posted

I have used linux many times and try to install a new distro every once in a while, but being in college makes it tough (mostly networking difficulty with ResNet). Just this week I was working on a paper for my engineering class and the formatting was very important. My partner and I worked on his gentoo pc using open office and submitted out rough draft online. When we got the paper back from the graders, the formatting was completely raped. So that makes me not want to switch. The OS is great, but the big apps just aren't there yet (Office mostly, plus I don't want to have to try and replace AutoCAD, Inventor, and 3DStudioMAX)

So, I'll keep playing around in linux in my spare time and when its where I want it to be, I'll go from 99%windows 1%linux, to something more like linux>windows...just not yet

Grand Master

null_

Posted
Posted

I've switched back and forth between Windows and Linux for about the last 4 1/2 years.

One of the biggest problems for me is there really isn't a standardized software installation system. In RedHat/Fedora and Mandrake you have RPM. In Ubuntu you have DEB. In source based distributions (Gentoo), you usually get to download the source code and compile it. Some package managers included in distributions such as Fedora or Ubuntu do make things alot easier and they are headed one step in the right direction.

Another big problem: Hardware support. Some distributions are better with hardware than others. In my case, Fedora configured power management for my laptop correctly, but yet my sound did not work (and yes I tried to get it to work and finally gave up). In Ubuntu, all of my hardware worked but power management was a dog. Sometimes the machine would suspend correctly, other times it would hang or not suspend at all.

GNOME needs some work as well. In Ubuntu, if I log in at the GDM, log out, and log back in again, sometimes I receive an error stating "I've already detected a panel running. gnome-panel will now exit." To remedy this I have to go to the console or open a terminal, run "killall gnome-panel", and then log out and back in again. In Gentoo it is a similar issue only instead of logging in at the GDM, I log in at the command line.

KDE is a bit better when it comes to stability, but in my experience it uses alot more RAM than it should need.

Linux is nice (Gentoo in this case) for servers, because remote administration is a breeze. Hell, you can remotely install the operating system, install packages, etc.

Another thing Linux needs to improve on is the UI. For instance, some windows have font smoothing enabled while other windows don't. Some fonts smooth, some look plain hideous because they do not antialias correctly. It's annoying as hell to go from a smooth looking font to a non-aliased font that looks jagged like a cliff.

Distribution providers all need to get together and decide on a default uniform interface that sets it apart from Windows so it does not look alot like the Windows UI, yet maintaining usability and good looks. Yes, I agree, choice is good. But by default, one UI set or another should be used by all distributions instead of all different looks. Instead of having GNOME as default on Fedora and Ubuntu and KDE as default on Mandrake, have GNOME on all of the distributions by default. Instead of Fedora using Bluecurve and Ubuntu using Industrial, lets by default all just use Bluecurve. Leave all of the other choices available though. If someone wants to use Blackbox instead of GNOME, all the power to them.

I also think that distribution providers shouldn't install a whole bunch of software by default. Yes, like I've said before, choice is good. But I don't need 3 GB of stuff I'm NEVER going to use. And to pick through every little package to narrow my installation down just isn't good enough. I really do like Gentoo because of their idea of just installing a base system and then you add what you want and need without ALL of the un-needed overhead. Yes, there's going to be some overhead due to dependancies and such. But 3GB of stuff installed by default is rediculous. Fedora has the options for installing less packages at installation time and for that I applaud them. Ubuntu also has this idea down quite well, their distribution installs the base packages to get yourself off the ground and get your basic tasks done, everything else that you need can be added with Repositories in Synaptic or by using the apt-get solution.

Overview of this rediculously long post:

Before I'd switch to Linux as a main OS, and before it is ready for the mainstream market, distribution providers will need to improve on the following items:

- Better Hardware Support

- Better Power Management Support

- Better User Interface Design

- Uniform Default UI for ALL distros

- Make package installation easier, less overhead involved

Until some of these changes are made, I'm going to remain a loyal Microsoft customer and Windows user.

Veteran

g-n-t

Posted
Posted

kde does not use a lot of ram, it wastes a lot, but when the going gets tough, it can slim itself down a LOT and very rarely uses swap space.

right now on my 512mb pc, KDE is using 480mb and no swap space. however, if you look at the breakdown of the memory use, linux with kde and opera is only using about 130mb.

look. the blue is the application data and is the actual ram used by linux/apps. even though the yellow(cached) might seem to be taking up a lot of ram, watch how it compresses as more apps are opened up. the blue rises higher while the yellow stays level. no swap space is ever used. also, even with all this crap opened up, the system is still 100% responsive. try doing that with windows.

snapshot24th.th.png

windows on the other hand has 300megs of ram empty and has 200megs of swap used for no reason at all.

Mentor

mr_daemon

Posted
Posted
I'll switch to linux when GAIM has a better GUI and has more of the features of the offical MSN client and when openoffice is either more popular or has 100% compatibility with MS Office.  :D

585563890[/snapback]

Gaim has a better gui than MSN to me, I like tabs. I end up using Gaim even on windows. File transfer now works flawlessly just like messenger 6 and over, Avatars are supported and that really is the only feature I need from the official client ;)

As for OpenOffice, patience young grasshoper. Ooo 2.0 is right around the corner, and they claim it has better office compatibility. :)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.