Has Ubuntu Replaced Windows on Your Box?

[ubuntu at rio.vg]

Ken N9VV wrote:
> 
> Yes, it is true that Linux has taken giant strides in the last 12 
> months and has matured and stabilized in admirable leaps. However 
> have you tried something simple like:
>
> (a) find a graphical editor for menu.lst used by Grub?

Why would you want to?

> (b) installed a new Dell with an ATI X600 video card?

No, but I have a fairly new Dell Laptop with an Nvidia Go, no problems
whatsoever.

> (c) tried to dual boot a PC only to find that you have to figure out 
> the "--root-directory=" command in grub-install.

I've never had to do that with a dual-boot machine, and I've had many,
including this laptop.

> (d) tried to get your ZyDAS WiFi zd1211b USB device working?

Honestly, that's not really fair.  Is that device on the supported list?

> (e) looked for a trivial program that will import your bookmarks 
> (from Firefox) and periodically watch the websites for changes?

I believe I saw a firefox extension to do that without all the bother of
exporting the bookmarks...

> (f) tried to play with comiz and the innovative 3d desktop?

Yup.  Worked somewhat, but that was expected, the whole system is VERY
VERY BETA.

> (g) last week (August 1, 2006) I used Synaptic to get the latest 
> updates and now my system will not successfully boot into Ubuntu 
> without using the rescue option.

I've never had that happen, but then, I've had that happen to Windows.

> (h) tried to find a way to totally refresh my Ubuntu 6.06 LTC O/S 
> while keeping my /home dir?

That's easy, just back it up and copy it back after the refresh.  Or if
you've got /home on it's own partition, you don't even need to do that.

> I admit that my Linux is experience wonderfully stimulating. Linux 
> is indeed intriguing, but it is also frustratingly opaque, complex, 
> arcane, and obscure. Yet is draws me like a powerful magnet with 
> it's seductive promise of so much positive energy and obvious 
> successful outcomes.

"Opaque"!?!?  Do you even understand what that means?!  Linux is, by
far, the most transparent system in the world.  It can sometimes be
complex, arcane, and obscure, especially when you try to do things that
aren't as common, but opaque it is not.  You can look at every single bt
of source code.  Everything is done step-by-step to be as transparent as
possible.

Windows, by comparison, is an ugly muddled black box.  Shuffling through
endless series of submenus and tabs searching for that one option you
need to change.  Having to individually download every separate driver
from separate webpages... ever tried to take the hard drive out of a
Windows box and move it into a different machine?  It's not pretty.  I
just did that the other day with linux, all I had to set the IP address
and point alsa at the correct sound card, just a few clicks.  Heck,
windows demands I reinstall drivers if I move a card from one PCI slot
to another.

What I'm trying to point out: Windows has trained you a certain way.
You look at linux and think "What has changed" rather than seeing all
the windows headaches that you're dumping.  Also, more than one of the
above has to do with dual-booting.  How much of that is really Linux's
fault?  Why don't you ask why Microsoft doesn't offer you the ability to
boot into Linux?

And next time you buy a computer, ask for Linux-compatible components.
Once enough people do, hardware manufacturers will be forced to support
Linux, or lose out to their competitors.