Free Your PC, Learn Linux, Embrace The Future

[d3sl91]

How long ago was the last time you tried and what hardware were you installing it on? In the last year or two, the majority of the more popular distros tend to install easier and faster than windows. Don't get discouraged, it might be something simple that you're missing or doing wrong.

 

I usually give it a whirl whenever there is a major update to any of the major Distros, or, I have a need to install an OS onto a system, and dont necessarily have a copy of windows to use. 

 

The windows laptop I had, the webcam doesnt work and neither does the audio. And it's an issue everyone has, and nobody is going to fix. Something with the chip manufacturer being to closed-source about it. 

 

On a laptop, I could deal with a new OS that is a bit buggy, but, my desktop is built for gaming and work. Neither can I do seamlessly on a linux distro unless I use a virtualization of something. (Bla bla, indie games, bla bla - yeah i know, I have a macbook pro and am aware of the games available for the lesser-used OSs, but I dont play many of those). 

 

And dont take this the wrong way. It's just, as I get older my Fun:Work ratio has flip-flopped. So, days of tinkering and whatnot are getting lesser and lesser - and it's also the reason why Linux will not become more popular than MacOS and Windows anytime soon. Relearning, Rebooting, Troubleshooting all take time, and time = money. And most people, and most companies will not deal with that well. 

[Frix]

Had I the money and space I'd assemble four systems

 

- Two systems running Windows [7,8.1, perhaps 10] (one having an AMD GPU, the other having an Nvidia)

- Two systems running various Linux Distros ((X)(K)Ubuntu, Mint, debian, mint, fedora, etc) - one having an AMD GPU, and the other having a Nvidia GPU.

I watched the video after they mentioned they had the new channel on The Tek. Realized I had a spare hard drive threw linux on that shit.

[Jerakl]

I know for a fact that you can run windows games in a VM just like you would on a native windows machine.

 

The alternative to dual-booting just to run your windows games is to install Linux as your native OS and install windows in KVM and use PCIe passthrough to your main GPU. Not only will windows actually run better and faster this way (for various reasons) but some games may also run better and faster. Part of the reason for this is because Linux uses a faster and more efficient file structure system vs. windows and windows (in the VM) actually uses the Linux file system. There are also a number of processes that no longer need to run in windows in the VM, which also frees up more system resources, potentially increasing performance even more. This method also makes taking snapshots and restoring the windows VM to a previous backup point much easier than using the windows own restore methods. And, because windows is contained within a VM, there is still virtually no risk of viruses or malware or any of that. If your windows VM becomes infected, it is contained within the VM and can simply be restored to a previous snapshot (prior to infection), completely eliminating the malicious software.

 

People often like to focus on what Linux can't do, but what they don't realize is that Linux can actually do everything windows can and much much more. It is the only OS that can truly unlock the full capabilities of your hardware.

Got a guide?

[ObeseWalrus]

Linux is already in our life in one way or another. If it is as Android or some ATM or even the machine you buy your train ticket on, you are still using it.

 

You should not have to "learn linux" when it is ready for ordinary Mr. and Mrs. Smith it will be as easy as Windows.

[MEC-777]

 

But we here are mostly enthusiast. If not us then who will use it. But i guess its different stores for different folks. I've seen a lot linux users on our forums. 5 years ago that was not the case.

 

 

Linux is not just for the enthusiast. It's for almost anyone with a PC. For most average users out there who mainly use a PC for browsing the web, emails, documents, and media consumption, Linux is perfect for them too. It would save them the cost of buying windows which is bloated with a mountain of junk they don't need and a resource-heavy, inefficient OS. If people would just give it a try and use it, they would see this. Example; My mother-in-law is now using Mint 17.1. she switched cold-turkey from only knowing windows prior and is loving it so far. Saved her $100 off the cost of her new PC and she's exstatic about not having to worry about viruses and malware.   

 

I usually give it a whirl whenever there is a major update to any of the major Distros, or, I have a need to install an OS onto a system, and dont necessarily have a copy of windows to use. 

 

The windows laptop I had, the webcam doesnt work and neither does the audio. And it's an issue everyone has, and nobody is going to fix. Something with the chip manufacturer being to closed-source about it. 

 

On a laptop, I could deal with a new OS that is a bit buggy, but, my desktop is built for gaming and work. Neither can I do seamlessly on a linux distro unless I use a virtualization of something. (Bla bla, indie games, bla bla - yeah i know, I have a macbook pro and am aware of the games available for the lesser-used OSs, but I dont play many of those). 

 

And dont take this the wrong way. It's just, as I get older my Fun:Work ratio has flip-flopped. So, days of tinkering and whatnot are getting lesser and lesser - and it's also the reason why Linux will not become more popular than MacOS and Windows anytime soon. Relearning, Rebooting, Troubleshooting all take time, and time = money. And most people, and most companies will not deal with that well. 

 

There are certain pieces of hardware that require extra steps to get them working properly and some will not work at all because either drivers were never made, or because the hardware maker decided not to support open-source - like in the case of your laptop webcam. It should be noted that in such cases like that, it's not the fault of Linux that it doesn't work, it's the fault of the hardware maker for not supporting open-source.

 

If you're willing to learn, it is possible to actually write your own drivers for a specific piece of hardware you want to use (something you can't do with windows). Understandably, most people aren't going to do that and that's a lot to go through just to get a webcam to work.

 

One way to improve your chances of having everything work as it should is to check that the hardware you're installing Linux on is among the more popular brands/components/models (this is more important with newer hardware). Most older hardware is farely well covered - partly why Linux works so well on older machines. Example; I threw Lubuntu on my mother-in-law's old core 2 duo PC and everything works just fine without any other messing around. However, when I tried running various distros on my newly built HTPC (see sig for specs) back in the summer of last year, I had all kinds of issues, mainly with video and audio drivers/performance. Part of the problem was because I was using brand new hardware that had just been released only months earlier. Quite simply, the drivers in the Kernel hadn't yet been updated and optimized for the hardware I was running it on. It's not a fault of Linux, there's just far fewer people working on new drivers for Linux. If I tried running one of the latest distros now, there's a good chance it will probably work/run much better now than it did 6 months ago. Linux is always in a constant state of development and improvement.

 

There are a lot more than just indie games available natively on Linux, BTW.

 

Yeah I totally understand what you're saying. There are cases and situations where it does make more sense to just use windows, whether it be for windows-only specific programs. Eventhough there are ways around that, not everyone has the time, nor wants to spend that time to do so. That is your choice to make, ultimately. It's not a bad idea to have a spare machine kicking around with Linux on it that you can play around with when you're in the mood though.

 

Got a guide?

 

I am actually planning on creating a detailed guide on how to do this once I have it all up and running on Project Acebox (check sig). You could also check out the link and vids @Name Taken posted.

 

Linux is already in our life in one way or another. If it is as Android or some ATM or even the machine you buy your train ticket on, you are still using it.

 

You should not have to "learn linux" when it is ready for ordinary Mr. and Mrs. Smith it will be as easy as Windows.

 

Using the GUI desktop environment, it's not all that different from windows anyways. You still have all the same basic functional elements that are relatively easy for just about anyone to learn and figure out. Like I mentioned, my mother-in-law is now using Linux and she's been able to figure things out on her own without asking me for help. All you need is a little comon sense.

 

An amazing thing about Linux is that it can be what ever the user wants or needs it to be, whether you're a basic or advanced user. You have complete control over what you want to do with it.

[Georgicvs]

This thread caught my interest because I think Linux.is cool.

 

I can see that Linux will be the future.  I can see the possibility to fully control my machine and use it to its potential. I can also see that, at some point in time or another; I'm going to have to go out of my way five or ten steps to learn Linux.  

 

Using the command line is cool and all, but I simply do not feel like learning the commands.  I have no reason to when I can use a computer running Windows and get my work/play done with minimal effort and in less time, never having to touch the command line.  Until Linux doesn't require me to mess with the command line; I'm gonna be primarily using Windows.

 

I haven't tried to do any real gaming with the machine I'm using Linux on, but it sounds like a huge pain.  I don't want to have to use a VM.  Maybe I'm just a weirdo, but I'd rather not mess with VMs or Wine, or any other workarounds if I do not have to. VMs are easy to use for people who know how, but I, once again, do not feel like learning even such a simple thing.

 

I don't want to have to use a command line or VMs, etc., but I don't want to suffer the insulting and degrading experience of using something Android-like simply because I refuse to use a command line.  At that rate, why not stick with Windows, the "best of both worlds"?

 

 

 

 

[Jerakl]

Le snip

 

What distros do you recommend for beginners?

[alicskysareblue]

I really really enjoy ubuntu, and basically use it for most things now other then games 

-workspace 

- you are not restricted to the desktop environment (seriously on my desktop I use cinnamon and forgot about unity) 

-most programs are free

- VERY space efficient ( I have it installed on a 256 partition on my desktop and a 180 gb partition on my laptop)  way more then enough room

- does not require any chipset driver as it is not chipset or cpu bound

 

and probably more, the only thing I will say is that getting into linux is not easy I am currently taking a network admin class on unix so this really is just good practice for me.

[Dabombinable]

Yeah.... I'll learn Linux after I learn how to write my own drivers. Aparrently writing drivers specifically for your computer can lead to larg performance gains (still not sure as I'm, as mentioned, learning).

[MEC-777]

This thread caught my interest because I think Linux.is cool.

 

I can see that Linux will be the future.  I can see the possibility to fully control my machine and use it to its potential. I can also see that, at some point in time or another; I'm going to have to go out of my way five or ten steps to learn Linux.  

 

Using the command line is cool and all, but I simply do not feel like learning the commands.  I have no reason to when I can use a computer running Windows and get my work/play done with minimal effort and in less time, never having to touch the command line.  Until Linux doesn't require me to mess with the command line; I'm gonna be primarily using Windows.

 

I haven't tried to do any real gaming with the machine I'm using Linux on, but it sounds like a huge pain.  I don't want to have to use a VM.  Maybe I'm just a weirdo, but I'd rather not mess with VMs or Wine, or any other workarounds if I do not have to. VMs are easy to use for people who know how, but I, once again, do not feel like learning even such a simple thing.

 

I don't want to have to use a command line or VMs, etc., but I don't want to suffer the insulting and degrading experience of using something Android-like simply because I refuse to use a command line.  At that rate, why not stick with Windows, the "best of both worlds"?

 

Game devs choosing to not support Linux is not the fault of Linux. Linux is not made to be purposely incompatible with games, it's the other way around. If game devs want their games on the Linux platform, then it's up to them to port it to Linux. This is becoming more of a thing and will only grow more popular in the future. Look how many games on steam were Linux compatible just 2 or even 1 year ago vs. today.

 

All that aside, if all you want is the easiest way possible, then perhaps you should stick with the windows software console. Just understand that windows is certainly not "the best of both worlds". It's bloated, a resource hog, inefficient and carries with it a slew of it's own problems which, to me, are more annoying to deal with than having to type in a few commands in a terminal. But, the choice is yours.

 

The true "best of both worlds" would be running windows in a VM on a Linux-hosted machine. This way, you can run 100% of your programs and games, windows runs better within it, restoring your windows container is easier and you're virtually safe from any viruses and malware. Typing in a command can actually be faster and easier than running your mouse all over the screen and clicking on a bunch of things to achieve the same end result. Not to mention, the terminal has it's own built in manual...

 

To each, his/her own.

 

 

What distros do you recommend for beginners?

 

Mint and Ubuntu are the first that come to mind. They're all relatively easy to install and start using and have a good solid community for support. They also have vast repositories of free programs to suit your needs that can be easily installed via the software manager.

 

 

Forgot to mention this earlier with regards to SteamOS (this is to everyone) - I would only use SteamOS if the machine you're installing it on is purpose-built only for gaming. All it is is a modified version of Debian setup to run Steam in big-picture mode on start up. You can have the exact experience of SteamOS by simply clicking big-picture mode in Steam. Thus, I would suggest using a different distro of your choice and simply install Steam on it instead of messing about with SteamOS (it has it's issues with installation). This way you have a fully functioning OS that you can use to watch netflix or media content and Steam big-picture mode for when you feel like gaming on the couch.

[ShadowCaptain]

SNIP

 

Still don't know how using it would benefit me, other than making life more of  a hassle

[Lumi]

Sorry to bust your balls here but Linux isn't going to be the future of PC's any time soon unfortunately. The reason being people are familiar with windows, windows doesn't change too drastically with new versions of the OS, there isn't different "distributions" of windows (well, i mean of course xp, vista, 7, 8, and 10 (but official distro's)). The last reasoning is because, well. DirectX is far ahead of OpenGL, and I don't see linux being able to achieve the graphical optimizations of windongs any time soon.

[MiracleMan]

I am now using Linux (mainly Arch) exclusively for almost 1 1/2 years private and for work. I have a Win7 VM if i have no other choice which actually happens pretty fucking rarely.

Gaming on Linux is not that bad tbh, look at the SteamOS section on Steam, a ton of brilliant games. And take a look at Wine, a bit of a hassle to set up and run but if you really want to play a specific game on Linux there is always a way.

 

To the Linux is the future thingy: Yes and no.

Linux skills are more and more appreciated and even required in tech related job fields, and that will ofc show in private use as well. But i don't think Linux is for everyone.

What i say now is my personal opinion, Ubuntu, ElementaryOS and so on have every right to exist. Keep this in mind.

But if i see how many people use incredibly dumbed down Linux distributions, full of bloatware etc.pp I can't help myself but think that they should have probably stuck with Windows. Of course there are people who want a simple OS with mostly graphical UIs and don't want the "locked-down-ness" (i know thats not a word, but it gets the point across i guess) of Windows or OSX but from my expierience thats a rather small part.

Windows is a brilliant operating system, nobody can deny that, and if you just want a good out of the box OS with mostly flawless compatibility thats your way to go.

 

But I think every PC enthusiast and IT professional should seriously consider switching to Linux. If you are willing to invest a certain amount of time to getting to know the Linux kernel and different distributions and maybe learn some basic shell scripting and python (c if you want to go really deep) you basically have unlimited opportunitys with Linux.

I'm not gonna lie, especially if you are unexperienceed with scripting/programming it has a very steep learning curve and the first couple of weeks (maybe months) are going to be frustrating, but if you are sticking through that this OS is so rewarding.

I know i am geeking out a little but but lets be honest... we all do that every now and then.

I cannot explain how satisfying to use an OS is that you customized perfectly for your needs over serveral months, my workflow has skyrocketed a couple of weeks after i switched to linux.

 

TL;DR: If you are seriosu about IT give linux a try, at least 1 month linux exclusive, because you will hate it in the beginning for sure. But don't tell your mum to use linux, windows is perfectly fine for the average user and probably even better.

[MEC-777]

Still don't know how using it would benefit me, other than making life more of  a hassle

 

I don't know which post of mine you quoted, but I can ask you this;

 

Do you want to be free from the risk of viruses, malware etc.?

Do you want to have more of your system resources available and not taken up by unnecessary processes?

Do you want full control over your OS and hardware?

Do you want a free OS?

Do you want to learn more about how your computer works, how to control and access it's full potential?

Do you want to learn new things?

 

If you answered yes to even just a few of these, you can benefit from using Linux.

 

Sorry to bust your balls here but Linux isn't going to be the future of PC's any time soon unfortunately. The reason being people are familiar with windows, windows doesn't change too drastically with new versions of the OS, there isn't different "distributions" of windows (well, i mean of course xp, vista, 7, 8, and 10 (but official distro's)). The last reasoning is because, well. DirectX is far ahead of OpenGL, and I don't see linux being able to achieve the graphical optimizations of windongs any time soon.

 

There are many distros that are very similar. Mint, Ubuntu and many others are very similar in the way they are put together. I get that people are familiar with windows, don't like change and don't want to try something new. And that is very unfortunate. A big part of the reason Linux isn't more widely used is simply because of people's attitudes towards Linux, not because of Linux itself. 

 

I'm a big advocate of the concept "if nothing changes, nothing will improve."

 

Linux graphics drivers have improved drastically over the last few years and are still being improved as we speak. Is it at the level of current DX and mantle API's? No. Is it close? For many applications, yes. Will it get there? Yes. How soon? I don't know, but the more people use it, the sooner it will happen.

 

-snip-

 

Agree with most of what you said, but I do have a few arguments for some of the points you made...

 

Yes, some distros are more "bloated" than others, but may I just point out, they are still FAR from being as bloated as windows and still run far more efficiently with regards to system resources. There isn't really any such thing as a "dumbed down" version of Linux because they're all built on the same underlying Kernel (for the most part) and are basically different pre-packaged software and GUI configurations. Beyond that they can still be customized and manipulated as the user sees fit.

 

Your last statement, "But don't tell your mum to use linux, windows is perfectly fine for the average user and probably even better." I must actually argue for the opposite of this. Most average users browse the web, do online banking, work with word documents, stream online content (netflix, YT etc.) and consume media (video and music playback). Linux does all this without any issues and without getting in the way. Above that, you have virtually no need for anti-virus and anti-malware software. Wouldn't your mum rather not worry at all about those kinds of things? Windows, IMO is unnecessary for most of the average user's needs and I believe that they believe they have to use windows because they A: don't know of any other alternative and B: it's what they've always used in the past. That mental cycle needs to and can be broken.

 

As I've mentioned several times now; my mother-in-law is now using Linux Mint on her new home PC. She is not tech savvy and not technically minded, nor has she ever used Linux before in her life - only windows. She is loving Linux. It does everything she needs it to, she doesn't have to worry about viruses etc. and it doesn't get in the way. In fact she asked me, "my why isn't everyone else using it?" to which I simply replied, "because people are too stubborn to try something new and different, even if it's actually better than what they're used to." 

 

Tis a sad reality, but if people could just stop and actually give it a solid try, they could see that Linux is actually not hard to use at all and in some ways is actually easier to use than windows (with regards to most average user's needs).

[Lumi]

I don't know which post of mine you quoted, but I can ask you this;

 

Do you want to be free from the risk of viruses, malware etc.?

Do you want to have more of your system resources available and not taken up by unnecessary processes?

Do you want full control over your OS and hardware?

Do you want a free OS?

Do you want to learn more about how your computer works, how to control and access it's full potential?

Do you want to learn new things?

I'm not even going to argue with you, you obviously know nothing about linux. Let's go over this together.

 

Do you want to be free from the risk of viruses, malware etc.?

You aren't because you use linux. Here's a good example. http://www.itnews.com.au/News/396197,first-shellshock-botnet-attacks-akamai-us-dod-networks.aspx

 

Do you want to have more of your system resources available and not taken up by unnecessary processes?

The only reason that'd be happening in the first place is if you don't install a shit ton of packages.

 

Do you want full control over your OS and hardware?

lol.

 

Do you want a free OS?

again, lol.

 

Do you want to learn more about how your computer works, how to control and access it's full potential?

lol, once again.

 

Do you want to learn new things?

Who says there's not new things for people to learn on windows?

[MiracleMan]

Yes, some distros are more "bloated" than others, but may I just point out, they are still FAR from being as bloated as windows and still run far more efficiently with regards to system resources. There isn't really any such thing as a "dumbed down" version of Linux because they're all built on the same underlying Kernel (for the most part) and are basically different pre-packaged software and GUI configurations. Beyond that they can still be customized and manipulated as the user sees fit.

Of course it is still the Linux kernel and you have the same possibilitys in Ubuntu as Arch or Debian, but a kind of extreme example of what i mean:

User X wants to use Linux, he reads a bit and thinks, hey, Ubuntu looks pretty, the UI isn't even that different from Windows!

He will settle with Ubuntu and might not see the need to use the terminal that much (which is kinda ok i guess, but the terminal is what makes unix based operating systems so great in the first place).

And because all the UIs and controls are so similar to Windows, he probably won't think about (or be interested in) customizing his OS to improve is workflow.

And Arch, as the other extreme, forces you to find the software that suits you and if you don't optimize your OS you won't be having any fun.

(Not saying that everyone should use arch tho, there are plenty of good distros)

And with todays hardware efficiency is not a big problem for office work/browsing/entertainment, windows is doing ok in that field for 90% of user i think

 

Your last statement, "But don't tell your mum to use linux, windows is perfectly fine for the average user and probably even better." I must actually argue for the opposite of this. Most average users browse the web, do online banking, work with word documents, stream online content (netflix, YT etc.) and consume media (video and music playback). Linux does all this without any issues and without getting in the way. Above that, you have virtually no need for anti-virus and anti-malware software. Wouldn't your mum rather not worry at all about those kinds of things? Windows, IMO is unnecessary for most of the average user's needs and I believe that they believe they have to use windows because they A: don't know of any other alternative and B: it's what they've always used in the past. That mental cycle needs to and can be broken.

 

Well, picture this:

My mum wants to watch Netflix on her fresh Mint install but cannot get it to work. Maybe she even thinks about using google and she just finds a bunch of articles called about Silverlight and Pipelight.

Does that help her? No

Scenario number 2: In germany, if you make your tax declaration, there is a specific software from the government you have to use, and there is a new version every year.

What if she runs into dependency/compadibility issues while installing it? People who are not tech savvy can't just solve problems like that like we do, through googling. They will not understand what they find in Linux forums or wikis.

And if a lot of people switch over to linux there will be just as many viruses as for windows, don't kid yourself, the OS is not safer, it is just less profitable for e-crime.

Greetings

[LOLZpersonok]

My laptop is set up to dual boot with Windows 8.1 and Ubuntu 14.10. I almost never use Ubuntu, because the way it controls the touchpad is weird to me and my speakers sound absolutely awful in Ubuntu. Not really sure why, the Beats Audio control panel in Windows probably has nothing to do with it (For the record, Beats Audio in computers is just a marketing gimmick). Also, my games are all under Windows and I'm not going to use Wine or something of the sort so I could use them on Ubuntu.

 

Simply put, Linux isn't my thing. If it is your thing, it's not for me to judge. Even if its userbase is growing, there's no knowing of whether or not it'll keep growing and take over the massive Windows userbase and the expanding Mac userbase any time soon. I really like the polished user interface of Ubuntu and I want to give Linux Pantheon a try, but my preference lies with Windows.

 

Just my two cents. 

[MEC-777]

I'm not even going to argue with you, you obviously know nothing about linux. Let's go over this together.

 

Do you want to be free from the risk of viruses, malware etc.?

You aren't because you use linux. Here's a good example. http://www.itnews.com.au/News/396197,first-shellshock-botnet-attacks-akamai-us-dod-networks.aspx

 

Do you want to have more of your system resources available and not taken up by unnecessary processes?

The only reason that'd be happening in the first place is if you don't install a shit ton of packages.

 

Do you want full control over your OS and hardware?

lol.

 

Do you want a free OS?

again, lol.

 

Do you want to learn more about how your computer works, how to control and access it's full potential?

lol, once again.

 

Do you want to learn new things?

Who says there's not new things for people to learn on windows?

 

I consider myself still "new" to Linux, but I certainly know more than "nothing" about it.

 

Saying Linux is virus and malware free is perhaps the wrong choice of words. It's not completely immune - as that link you provided indicates. However, you're still FAR better off compared to windows. In windows, updating something as simple as Java can easily add unwanted malicious software if the user forgets to uncheck the "do not install ask toolbar" box during the process. In windows, simply clicking a wrong link can open up all kinds of headaches. You're not going to run into those kinds of problems with Linux.

 

As for more system resources available. - Even if you do install a heavier distro or a pile of packages, Linux is still more efficient with how it uses your system resources and you have better control over those software packages.

 

Don't know why you laughed at the next 3 points. Have nothing constructive to say? I'm up for a civilized discussion and I'm not afraid to be proven wrong or corrected.

 

I Never said you couldn't learn new things on windows. 

[Lumi]

I consider myself still "new" to Linux, but I certainly know more than "nothing" about it.

 

Saying Linux is virus and malware free is perhaps the wrong choice of words. It's not completely immune - as that link you provided indicates. However, you're still FAR better off compared to windows. In windows, updating something as simple as Java can easily add unwanted malicious software if the user forgets to uncheck the "do not install ask toolbar" box during the process. In windows, simply clicking a wrong link can open up all kinds of headaches. You're not going to run into those kinds of problems with Linux.

 

As for more system resources available. - Even if you do install a heavier distro or a pile of packages, Linux is still more efficient with how it uses your system resources and you have better control over those software packages.

 

Don't know why you laughed at the next 3 points. Have nothing constructive to say? I'm up for a civilized discussion and I'm not afraid to be proven wrong or corrected.

 

I Never said you couldn't learn new things on windows.

Um, there's easily just as much malware for linux as there is for windows.

 

You're wrong again on point 2 again.

 

I lol'd because;

Do you want full control over your OS and hardware?

Do you want to delete important OS files on accident?

 

Do you want a free OS?

i mean, i didn't pay for windows and i'm sure none of my friends did either.

 

Do you want to learn more about how your computer works, how to control and access it's full potential?

?!?!?!?!?!? like you can't do that on windows while running a VM.

[MEC-777]

Of course it is still the Linux kernel and you have the same possibilitys in Ubuntu as Arch or Debian, but a kind of extreme example of what i mean:

User X wants to use Linux, he reads a bit and thinks, hey, Ubuntu looks pretty, the UI isn't even that different from Windows!

He will settle with Ubuntu and might not see the need to use the terminal that much (which is kinda ok i guess, but the terminal is what makes unix based operating systems so great in the first place).

And because all the UIs and controls are so similar to Windows, he probably won't think about (or be interested in) customizing his OS to improve is workflow.

And Arch, as the other extreme, forces you to find the software that suits you and if you don't optimize your OS you won't be having any fun.

(Not saying that everyone should use arch tho, there are plenty of good distros)

And with todays hardware efficiency is not a big problem for office work/browsing/entertainment, windows is doing ok in that field for 90% of user i think

 

Yeah, I totally get what you're saying here. As with anything else, there is a certain level of education and learning involved. How did all of us windows users learn all we currently know about windows? Some of it by being told by others and probably most of it by personal experience and learning on our own.

 

Yes, modern hardware is mostly so fast and capable that even a bloated, process-rich OS like windows doesn't even make most modern systems blink, for the most part. But that's still no excuse for inefficient software architecture. I'm currently running windows 10 on my HTPC and the other day I decided to check the system resources just to see how much ram it was using etc. To my surprise, it was using nearly 3GB and all that was running was Firefox with one tab open, streaming a show on netflix. The system had 4GB ram with 1GB dedicated to the APU's iGPU. There's simply no need for the OS to be using that much ram in the background. That's just one of my main beefs with windows and how it hogs resources. You should have to build a moderately powerful machine just to support the OS and have a snappy user experience.

 

Well, picture this:

My mum wants to watch Netflix on her fresh Mint install but cannot get it to work. Maybe she even thinks about using google and she just finds a bunch of articles called about Silverlight and Pipelight.

Does that help her? No

Scenario number 2: In germany, if you make your tax declaration, there is a specific software from the government you have to use, and there is a new version every year.

What if she runs into dependency/compadibility issues while installing it? People who are not tech savvy can't just solve problems like that like we do, through googling. They will not understand what they find in Linux forums or wikis.

And if a lot of people switch over to linux there will be just as many viruses as for windows, don't kid yourself, the OS is not safer, it is just less profitable for e-crime.

Greetings

 

I have a response for this 2nd part of your reply, I just don't have time at the moment to type it all out. Will come back later and edit.

 

[Dabombinable]

 

Yeah, I totally get what you're saying here. As with anything else, there is a certain level of education and learning involved. How did all of us windows users learn all we currently know about windows? Some of it by being told by others and probably most of it by personal experience and learning on our own.

 

Yes, modern hardware is mostly so fast and capable that even a bloated, process-rich OS like windows doesn't even make most modern systems blink, for the most part. But that's still no excuse for inefficient software architecture. I'm currently running windows 10 on my HTPC and the other day I decided to check the system resources just to see how much ram it was using etc. To my surprise, it was using nearly 3GB and all that was running was Firefox with one tab open, streaming a show on netflix. The system had 4GB ram with 1GB dedicated to the APU's iGPU. There's simply no need for the OS to be using that much ram in the background. That's just one of my main beefs with windows and how it hogs resources. You should have to build a moderately powerful machine just to support the OS and have a snappy user experience.

 

 

I have a response for this 2nd part of your reply, I just don't have time at the moment to type it all out. Will come back later and edit.

 

What's the OS your running? Because under Windows XP (I know its old-but it beats any Linux distro with a GUI when it comes to running on old hardware-even Lubuntu) after a fresh install no more than 90MB of RAM is used. And even with antivirus and the system utilities (soundcard utility, nvidia desktop manager etc), its using less than 512MB. The downside of XP however is that only my Diamond video cards don't require drivers to be installed, under Lubuntu everything is ready to go, with no driver or software installation needed at all for the standard office tasks (word, internet etc).

[Opcode]

What's the OS your running? Because under Windows XP (I know its old-but it beats any Linux distro with a GUI when it comes to running on old hardware-even Lubuntu) after a fresh install no more than 90MB of RAM is used. And even with antivirus and the system utilities (soundcard utility, nvidia desktop manager etc), its using less than 512MB. The downside of XP however is that only my Diamond video cards don't require drivers to be installed, under Lubuntu everything is ready to go, with no driver or software installation needed at all for the standard office tasks (word, internet etc).

Ram usage isn't exactly the best way to measure performance. Especially considering even tho your Windows XP setup only uses 90MB of ram I can guarantee it's also hitting your page file for at least that much. Access to memory is nearly instant which is where the performance comes from in software. A prime example would be a game server and a database. During a game server initial start up it parses everything in the database and stores it in memory for quick access (accessing memory is a hundred times faster than querying the database). The same thing is true for FPS games like Battlefield where the maps are parsed and the data is stored in memory for quick access. So memory usage isn't always the best way to determine if a piece of software is either fast or slow (as long as it's using memory properly). Linux on one hand does have a page file known as "Swap" which the system usually never touches until you run out of physical memory. Windows on the other hand you can sit at the desktop after a fresh install boot and it will use like 50MB of ram and 100MB of page file.

[rentaspoon]

Been using Linux Mint for a long time, it's not on my PC ATM due to lack of space but I loved it when I was DJing every day.

[Dabombinable]

Ram usage isn't exactly the best way to measure performance. Especially considering even tho your Windows XP setup only uses 90MB of ram I can guarantee it's also hitting your page file for at least that much. Access to memory is nearly instant which is where the performance comes from in software. A prime example would be a game server and a database. During a game server initial start up it parses everything in the database and stores it in memory for quick access (accessing memory is a hundred times faster than querying the database). The same thing is true for FPS games like Battlefield where the maps are parsed and the data is stored in memory for quick access. So memory usage isn't always the best way to determine if a piece of software is either fast or slow (as long as it's using memory properly). Linux on one hand does have a page file known as "Swap" which the system usually never touches until you run out of physical memory. Windows on the other hand you can sit at the desktop after a fresh install boot and it will use like 50MB of ram and 100MB of page file.

It is when your running a computer as old as mine.

[Opcode]

It is when your running a computer as old as mine.

What's your memory and page file usage on a fresh boot?