GNU/Linux Advocacy

[Eric Dunbar]

On 20/02/07, Myriam Schweingruber <myriam at pharma-traduction.ch> wrote:
> Le Mardi, 20. Février 2007, Eric Dunbar a écrit:
> > On 20/02/07, Amichai Rotman <amichai at iglu.org.il> wrote:
> > > Hello all,
> > >
> > > Just wanted to share something with ya'all:
> > >
> > > It seems since Micro$oft came out with they're new Vista with the
> > > outrageous minimum requirements, I am getting more and more inquires /
> > > questions and requests for information on making the switch to the better
> > > option: GNU/Linux.
> > >
> > > Of course I gladly answer and give out the CDs kindly provided by
> > > Canonical.
> > >
> > > So, finally, is there a reason to *thank* Mr. Bill Gates?....
> > >
> > > :-)
> >
> > Perhaps so, but I find that Ubuntu GNOME is no much less of a memory
> > hog (on the low-end machines) than Windows XP, and, compared to the
> > earlier stable versions of Windows (NT 4 SP 6, 2K) it actually
> > requires more resources to run well. Of course, if you're willing to
> > go with a crippled GUI you can manage with fewer computing resources,
> > but, then you're also sacrificing desktop functionality.
>
> On the Ubuntu side, you can use Xubuntu with the Xfce windowmanager, this runs
> on very little RAM and is designe specially for older hardware.  A very nice
> way to run Linux on old computers.
>
> BTW, I installed Ubuntu / Kubuntu / Xubuntu on my laptop which allows me to
> show various desktops to people interested before installing on their
> computer. With enough RAM and HD space I bluntly install these three desktop
> managers and leave it to the users what they prefer. Something I always
> wanted to do is get some feedback from these people, I'm planing it right now
> so expect a post about it on this list soon :-)

Please do post your user feedback on the different desktops. I've been
thoroughly disappointed by anything but GNOME/KDE but I'd like to know
what others (who are NOT Ubuntu users already... biased group ;-)
think (of course, I do come from the Mac world so I'm used to a much
higher GUI standard than a Windows/UNIX user ;-).

As for Xfce -- I'd call that a crippled desktop GUI, not suitable for
most users. Even Windows 95 (and, I'm no fan of the Windows franchise)
is a much more refined and usable desktop than Xfce (unless it's
improved _dramatically_ since 2005... which was when I last
experimented with the non-GNOME/KDE desktops/GUIs).. In many ways,
Microsoft did actually do quite a good job with the technical aspects
of the Windows 95 GUI (fast, especially on slow hardware) and they
lost a lot of their refinement when they went with the Windows XP GUI
(which, even on faster hardware leaves a lot to be desired -- much
like GNOME on slower hardware).