Ubuntu 8.04 Is Ready to Take On Windows
john.toliver at gmail.com
Fri May 2 12:53:29 UTC 2008
On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 09:24 +0100, Avi Greenbury wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:39:11 -0400
> John Toliver <john.toliver at gmail.com> wrote:
> > -Also, a systematic (AND DOCUMENTED) method for fixing a system that has
> > crashed. A proven, and documented method of recovering from the
> > majority of system failures. If the filesystem fails, a method that is
> > tested and fail safe to fix it. If Gnome/KDE decides to take a
> > vacation-A method to fix that. If your Xserver goes nuts, a method to
> > take care of that.
> If you want to start the project, I'm sure, as with all the others, you'll find willing contributors.
as with most, I'm stretched in too man directions as it stands but it's
on the todo list if someone doesn't beat me to it :-)
> > Then all the little things that don't work (but that
> > are really close to working if you tweak them enough (like being able to
> > simply plug your laptop into most any windows network and have it be
> > able to find the resources it needs, browse the network like if you were
> > on a windows machine etc.)
> You can pretty much do that on any 'desktop' OS.
> Why you'd want to browse the network like you're on a Windows machine is beyond me, though.
Well, I don't have experience with a pure *nix networking environment(neither do the average windows users btw) but I know this functionality hasn't
for me which isn't necessarily an endictment of Linux :-) but I've been
over the forums and have found many persons with similar problems. I
figure it will be fixed if it's really a problem with Samba or
firewalling etc., in the next release or through an update.
> > -Good documentation: Think support.microsoft.com. It may be a money
> > hungry company but they have documentation for everything and IT people
> > rely on that stuff..... I rely on it for work.
> There already is good documentation. It just happens to be written and distributed in much the same way as the OS.
Good point. Hence the statement "google is your friend". It's not to
say that in it's current form it's bad, just saying centralized is
> > *One area I think would really set Ubuntu ABOVE Windows, is if ALL the
> > necessary tools to repair most problems with an OS were included on the
> > CD/DVD.
> They generally are. What're you finding yourself missing?
> If they're not, there are free full recovery CDs.
OK I concede, I'm still working on the recovery aspect.... but at this
point, can I stick my original Hardy CD in and recover from most system
problems I can run into?
> > It's just
> > that too many odd undocumented problems exist out there. If it weren't
> > for this list, and the forums, Ubuntu might be in hot water. I went
> > from Gutsy to Hardy and blew the weekend trying to figure out how I was
> > going to fix openoffice, and a few other packages. That type of thing
> > shouldn't happen, I know it wasn't Canonicals fault but the problem is
> > still the same to the end user, who, if it's grandma, would still be
> > asking you why you took away her "Winders puter'.
> I've never had any real issues upgrading between major versions of Linux. Odd ones trying to downgrade, or skip ones out, but I can't imagine it's any cleaner with Windows.
> MS do tend to advocate the idea of rebuilding from scratch for each upgrade, though.
Well, this is true, and again, I think it's the nature of the beast,
but hardware that worked in a previous upgrade, now suddenly not, or
some functionality etc. Its getting there but isn't there yet.
> > But emphasis shouldn't really be on compiz, or any of the "bling" yet.
> > It should be on making the core functionality rock solid. It should
> > take a computer science major to break it,
> No. I completely and utterly disagree with that. When breaking something, it should be made obvious that you're breaking something. People in general should be made more aware of the inner workings of computers, computers shouldn't be made stupid.
Here in is I think a perfect example of the difference between the user
of a Linux, and a windows user. A Linux user may choose Linux because
of the superior software, because it's built on open principles, because
you can get under the hood and change what you like, in short FREEDOM,
and these are all fair and right (but not always conducive to business
needs) Most windows user just don't care! as they've been conditioned
not to. If it works great, if it doesn't toss it. Usually the only
issues concerning business are: how much is it going to cost to buy,
train, maintain, and fix?, and what is it going to do for me better?
This point of view is multiplied with business windows users who simply
need it to get the job done. Most, outside the IT world either don't
know, or don't care about Linux because it doesn't affect their work.
So my point in saying all of this is that while you're right that an OS
should educate it's user on the possibility of breaking it, it should
also be fairly difficult to do. I understand the conflict in what I'm
saying but on one hand you have to protect those users from themselves,
but on the other, you need to teach them how an OS is built (IF they
care to learn)
> > Once I can get excited
> > because I can do something windows can't, and then go to my friends
> > no-name-brand computer and do the same for him, then compiz is worth it.
> There's plenty. In fact, there're hundreds of small things that I keep noticing non-nix users seeing that you wouldn't particularly ask for, but they're incredibly handy.
> Personally, I'd rather all these 'niceties' than a switch to just being a free Windows.
I am still discovering many of these niceties, but I think, before we
start think about incredible graphics and "the cube", we need to
stabilize the forward steps being made. (I'm just bitter because my
laptop can't handle compiz ;-)
> > At that point, you can walk into businesses and say, "look what my OS
> > can do, it does everything you are already doing, it's more stable, just
> > as functional, just as secure, ****FREE****, and virtually no learning
> > curve.
> You already can, really. Except the learning curve, but that is changing.
Interestingly, I see MANY things where Windows seems to have imitated
Linux design concept. Interesting what a little perspective gives you.
> The biggest thing that Linux is missing, IMO, is a proper Exchange rival. But one-big-app-that-does-everything just isn't the nix way.
Now here in, I'm at a loss. I've no need of the collaboration tools exchange brings. I hated it the first and only time I tried to install it personally, but what would you say is the problem with it?
> Avi Greenbury
Patience yields far greater results than brute force or rage ever could
so relax......it's just life !!!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ubuntu-users