So should I change to Linux?

[Arneb]

I really don't like Windows. I have found an uneasy truce with XP, but XP will be over in the not-so-far future.

Neither am I particularly impressed with Apple computers. I never used one, but all the must-have-this-gadget, kneel-before-Jobs, we'll-take-care-of the config stuff rather turns me off. I don't carry a computer (or a mobile, or an mp3 player in order to be seen with it, either. And the prices...

Well, as someone around here uses to say, Microsoft is over if you want it. I recently bought a computer for my ma on ebay, including buying a few freely configurable extras; I set it up with a slipstreamed Windows XP SP3, and installed free software exclusively, having downloaded the relevant installation packets beforehand. It all went pretty well, including doing the slipstreaming and configuring a coded WLAN by hand. As far as I can see, the system is slim and straightforward, the entire installation taking up less than 10 GB on a 1 TB hard drive.

That wetted my appetite.

I often hear that several of Linux' incarnations have matured to the point where they become appealing to a user like me: No dummy, not really a hacker either, but interested and capable enough to do a bit of configuring the system for himself and to his own needs without getting into the more arcane stuff. I also like the idea of open-source software, less threats from all sorts of malware and a central shared software repository.

The question is, can I do it? What will I have to miss? How user-friendly is Linux, really (in particular, the new Ubuntu version)?

I'd very much appreciate help and thoughts from around here.

[Moose]

Arneb, I haven't really checked out anything recent, but Ubuntu has a very good rep. Basically, it all comes down to what you want to do with it. (Doesn't it always?)

Pretty much every Linux flavor have two major issues as far as new users are concerned: 1) Tyranny of choice, and 2) Sticking with it long enough to become comfortable. Advanced windows users often hit 3) Biting off too much, too early.

1) Most linux distros offer a rather alarming number of choices when it comes to installing software. You don't need to install everything, and you shouldn't try. I suggest listing your basic operating needs, one by one, and install one thing to meet each need. (Ex: Mailer- Thunderbird. Browser- Firefox. Word processor suite- Open Office, etc.)

If you don't like a given program, you can always go back and install something else. If you don't know why you need it, don't install it. That goes especially triple for servers. *chuckle* But then, you know all that.

On the same line of thought, expect a hassle if you intend to use your linux box to play DVD movies. It's entirely the RIAA's fault. But there are solutions. Just not comfortable ones. This is a "problem 3" situation, so plan to leave solving that for later.

Also, before you do the install, you want to browse to get a feel for what KDE and Gnome are going to look and feel like. You'll have to choose one over the other, and your mileage will vary, so check out some reviews before installing.

2) It seems obvious, but it's so very easy to underestimate the feeling of leaving one's comfort zone. If you're going to take the plunge, make yourself a promise to stick with it for a month or two, no matter what. It will get easier. It always does. I've had English and education majors switching back and forth between windows and HPUX like they were born to it within two months, back when unix/linux windows managers felt like the bricks they were.

3) If you go right in and try to do the nerdy stuff right off the bat, you may find yourself getting in over your head, and getting discouraged enough to give up on it. Start with the beaten path, noob user stuff like the browser and email client. Get comfortable with how Ubuntu developers think, and how they think you think. Get past the comfort curve. Then go ahead and build on it one or two steps at a time.

Also, get used to the idea that Linux isn't going to go very far to prevent you from getting yourself into trouble. Windows is notorious for babysitting you, even on trivial customizations. Linux will let you do anything at all to your installation. (On the same note, keep your data backed up, preferably on a separate drive.)

That was the long answer. The short answer is this: you _can_ do it, lots of people do, but expect that you will feel uncomfortable with it for the first few months. After that, you'll be comfortable enough to experiment.

[tdvance]

Before actually changing, download the free version of VMware Player, and download one of the Linux packages for it.

It will run slower than linux Native on your system, and I don't think some device support is there since VMware is essentially a virtual machine that sits between Linux and your physical computer, but it still runs pretty well, and you can try things out without affecting the existing Windows install--just delete if if you no longer want it. (this is also a way to try out the Windows 7 beta).

[eric_marsh]

I've got all the major platforms available to me on one laptop or another. But the machine that I do 98% of my work on is a 17" Macbook Pro. It's an expensive machine compared to the others but is pretty elegant and runs BSD Unix under the covers. Essentially I can pick up any machine that I like, but I usually end up on the Mac. When I do need to run windoz or linux I usually end up just doing so under VM Fusion.

[absael]

A couple of years ago, I used Linux (Debian) exclusively for about 6 months. This was my first exposure to it, and it was not overly difficult to get it to do almost everything I needed it to. I was running an older machine, and Debian picked up all the hardware with no issues.

The main problem that I had was with certain downloaded videos. I eventually got most of them to play, but I never did get the audio to work on one type, despite my entreaties for assistance on a large Linux forum.

I had to build a new computer and switch back to Windows when I began taking college classes online. I decided one day to set up my Windows box for dual boot with Debian. Everything went well until I tried to install a video driver (the resolution was not acceptable). I got a blank screen, and nothing I tried worked. I then tried 3 different versions of Linux, with the same result. I finally gave up; it appears that the kernel just doesn't support my ATI graphics card.

In short, you'll probably be fine with Linux as long as it supports your hardware (you can test this with a live CD), and you don't play PC games. But some things will require a substantial amount of manual tweaking to get working, and a few things may never work. On the upside, most distributions are very stable and many are easy to use, and there are a lot of very good applications for Linux that are available free, while their Windows counterparts are quite expensive. And besides the cost issue, most distributions and applications are free in the other sense - you don't have to agree to an onerous EULA to use it.

Incidentally, I wouldn't write XP off so quickly. I think it still has a few good years left.

[Tensor]

But the machine that I do 98% of my work on is a 17" Macbook Pro. It's an expensive machine compared to the others but is pretty elegant and runs BSD Unix under the covers.

am I particularly impressed with Apple computers. I never used one, but all the must-have-this-gadget, kneel-before-Jobs, we'll-take-care-of the config stuff rather turns me off. I don't carry a computer (or a mobile, or an mp3 player in order to be seen with it, either. And the prices...

It's interesting to me how everyone comments on the prices of Apples' computers. I was in line for a laptop and I was totally fed up with Windows. As such, I was taking a look at the MacBooks and I found something rather interesting. For what I wanted, the 17" MacBook Pro was priced within a couple of hundred dollars of the Windows laptop WITH THE SAME COMPONENTS.
That last part is important. I could find other laptops that cost a whole lot less, but then, their components, in no way, measured up to what I wanted. Not to mention the cost of antivirus subscriptions and pulling off all the crummyware that is put on the machine when you order it. I am quite happy with the MacBookPro and wonder, at least once a day, why I didn't make the change to Apple sooner. My wife, who doesn't know microchip from a megahertz, now wants her own MacBook, just from using the one I have a couple of times, as she is now fed up with our Windows based tower.

And Arneb, I'm not one of those who has to have all the lasted gadgets either. I don't have an Iphone or an Ipod. I don't buy into everything that Apple or Jobs does. But, my MacBook just works. That's what I want and that's what it gives me. If I simply have to run something from Windows, there is always Bootcamp, Fusion or Parallel.

[nauthiz]

I tend to prefer FreeBSD over Linux because of Moose's point 1. FreeBSD tends to offer fewer choices, instead picking one tool for each task that the FreeBSD team thinks is best and giving you that one. It makes getting the OS installed a whole lot less overwhelming, and it makes the whole environment feel a lot more cohesive. (Also, different FreeBSD computers are more consistent with each other than different Linux computers. Rather different from Linux, though, since they come from two different forks of the UNIX family tree.) If, further down the road, you'd like to try something else out, you're certainly allowed to install whatever software you want without any hassle.

[cjl]

17" macbook pro specs:

2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo
OSX
4GB RAM
500GB 5400rpm drive
1920x1200 LED display
Nvidia 9600M GT 512MB video card
802.11n wireless
Backlit keyboard
DVD burner
$2500

Dell 16" Studio XPS, better configured:

2.93GHz Core 2 Duo
Vista Home Premium x64
1920x1080 LED display
4GB RAM
256GB SSD
Blu-Ray reader
ATI Mobility Radeon 4670 1GB video card
802.11n wireless + wimax
bluetooth
$2350

(Oh, and if you remove the bluetooth, wimax, better video card, blu-ray, and SSD, it drops to $1850, and then it is comparable to the macbook as far as components are concerned)

I really don't see how that makes the macbook even remotely competitive in price. Don't get me wrong - they aren't bad computers, they are just horrendously overpriced for what they are.

[Arneb]

Thanks for your help, folks, and by all means, keep the comments coming. I appreciate Tensor's comments about the Apple, although I am unlikely to persuaded :).

You give me a lot to think about. Thanks again.

[Jeff Root]

I'd like to know more about the answer to Arneb's question of what we will
have to miss, not using Windows. Do I have to abandon all of the programs
I've acquired over the years? (Including programs I've written!)

-- Jeff, in Minneapolis

[nauthiz]

Some, but not all, Windows software will work under WINE, which is an implementation of the Win32 libraries on Unix. I believe Mono can run a lot of .NET software, but I'm not sure about that. I never used either, opting instead to use VMWare to run Windows in a virtual machine - or if you'd prefer not to pay for a copy, Q is a free VM that does a fairly good job, though it is much slower so it won't cut the mustard for software that requires much performance.

[nauthiz]

cjl - The price comparison varies quite a bit depending on what computers you're looking at. The baseline MacBook Pro sells for $1,200; the closest Dell laptop I noticed is the Latitude E4300, which starts at $1,676. But you'll have to shell out a few extra quid for a webcam and Bluetooth. They seem to have a sale going on, though, so at least for the moment you could pick one up for $1,344 (not including webcam and bluetooth).

[tdvance]

Under Linux, you lose those killer games. Of course, some old games have linux ports now (there's one for Duke Nukem 3D, but it runs slow on my box--the original being partly in assembly to optimize it under windows, but the port is not so optimized and reverts to the C code when the #ifdefs fail to determine you're on a successor to DOS--doesn't help it was written before floating point units were nearly universal, so it's all integer arithmetic, simulating floating point by various tricks, such as throwing away accuracy).

But various office apps, web browser, are still there. Starry Night is not on Linux, but plenty of decent substitutes are (and these DO run faster than bulky Starry Night, though perhaps not as photo-realistic).

E.g. I use Sibelius for music notation on Windows--there are Linux tools for that kind of thing, lillypond (based on TeX, but lacks some of the features I like about Sibelius) and I think it's called RoseGarden or something, which uses Lillypond for notation, but is really a sequencer/mixer type program.

A lot of brand-name software will not run on Linux, but for some of it you get good substitutes, and for some, you get poor substitutes--mix and match.


In the other direction, xemacs runs better on Linux than Windows, in the latter case getting confused sometimes with / versus \ for directories, and having some trouble with colors/fonts designed for the Unix world. That can be remedied by using xemacs under cygwin for windows, cygwin being a linux-like system that runs on windows, and gives you some of linux's tools (a fairly large number--but some are missing and/or broken--recompiling for cygwin not being trivial)

[cjl]

cjl - The price comparison varies quite a bit depending on what computers you're looking at. The baseline MacBook Pro sells for $1,200; the closest Dell laptop I noticed is the Latitude E4300, which starts at $1,676. But you'll have to shell out a few extra quid for a webcam and Bluetooth. They seem to have a sale going on, though, so at least for the moment you could pick one up for $1,344 (not including webcam and bluetooth).
How is the closest thing to a base macbook pro a Latitude E4300? I would say the Studio XPS 13 (base $999) is the closest to a base Macbook Pro. Configured as closely as I can get them to each other (2.53GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9400M graphics, DVD drive, LED display, 500GB HDD), the Macbook is $1650 while the Dell Studio XPS is $1310. That's actually quite a bit closer in price than they used to be, but it's still a definite price advantage in favor of the Dell.

As for Linux, I currently triple boot my computer (I have my main Vista x64 partition, a partition with the release candidate of Windows 7 x64 on it, and a partition with Ubuntu 9), and I find Ubuntu to be quite user friendly. I do too much that needs Windows to switch over completely (and besides, I really like Windows 7), but I do boot into Ubuntu every now and then, and haven't had any trouble at all. It's definitely gotten a lot better over the past couple of versions.

[Tensor]

How is the closest thing to a base macbook pro a Latitude E4300? I would say the Studio XPS 13 (base $999) is the closest to a base Macbook Pro. Configured as closely as I can get them to each other (2.53GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9400M graphics, DVD drive, LED display, 500GB HDD).

I could ask the same thing of you and the Studio 16 XPS. I specifically said the same components and the only two 17" monitors that Dell has on laptops are the Studio and the Alienware. The studio is not that good of a comparison as it is very limited in processor speed (2.6 Mhz), it's memory (DDR2 800 Mhz), or Graphics.

The Alienware can be made to match the 17" MacBook pro exactly, except for one component, and that component is a killer graphics card for the Dell(since they are pushing this as a gaming machine, that makes sense). The prices are Mac 2549 and the Dell 2310.

Now, I'm sure we can keep going around and around on which machines have the same components or which is better (you can get a 3.06 Mhz with 4 Meg and a 256 Gig Static drive for 2459 if you want to go the refubished route).

A lot depends on what you are going to use it for. Since I don't play those graphics intensive games, the card in the Dell is overkill. I now do a lot of set design work for Theatre and TV, along with some photographic work. As big a screen as I can get is a necessity, for showing people the my designs or the layouts their posters. Others, will find the 16" monitor and the graphics card their needed items.

In my case, the components on the Mac vs another model generated a difference of a couple of hundred dollars. I willingly paid that to get what I wanted. Getting away from Windows. Not worrying that much about viral problems, not worrying about configuring this or that, or having it freeze up on me. Like I said, it just works for me. It may not work for anyone else.

[Tensor]

I appreciate Tensor's comments about the Apple, although I am unlikely to persuaded :).

You give me a lot to think about. Thanks again.

Arneb, I didn't make those comments to change your mind, I was just giving you a different option.:) Don't let the "Apple computers are expensive" keep you from looking at a MacBook or a MacBook Pro. Go to an Apple store or reseller and play around with the laptops there for a couple of hours and ask questions. You might suprise yourself. ;)

[samkent]

My 2 cents.

I have been a DOS diehard since inception. But I do have to work in a windows world.
I use computers 7 days a week for business-business and a personal business plus the normal personal needs.
My personal use and in depth experience lies:
W2K since inception
Vista since Inception
Yes I have used XP and dabbled with Linux.

The simple truth is,
You cannot escape Windows no matter how hard you try.

Yes you can surf the web and type documents with Linux and open source. But you can’t buy just any old gadget at the store and expect it to work. I would be very upset if I could not install that fancy software that came with my new camera. It works with Windows!

Samsung business website ONLY works with the newer versions of IE.
You could receive an Excel file with embedded code that won’t work Open Office.

IMO The days of legitimate bashing of Windows is over. The new software and updated drivers for old hardware have plugged the gaps. I have been using Vista hard for over two years and NEVER had any problems with viruses or browser hijacking (the most irritating). I have never ran any virus software.

If I see it in the store, it works with Windows.
If it’s a web download, it works with Windows.

MS Access talks (programmatically) with Excel which talks with Word which talks with Windows. You just can’t get that with any other operating system.

[HenrikOlsen]

Samsung business website ONLY works with the newer versions of IE.
Which is an excellent reason not to do business with Samsung, if they're that technologically inept how can their other technology be any good.

[samkent]

Samsung provides a significant percentage of our income.

My point is in the business world it’s Microsoft. No IT guy is going to recommend anything that is not main stream. He would risk his job if the software failed and it wasn’t Microsoft. All the in house software is going to work with Microsoft first. They may not bother making it compatible with Mozilla. Samsung is just one example.

I know the basement hackers tout the virtues of other operating systems and browsers but they still have a Windows machine. And once they have to grow up and hold down a real job they do three things.
1 Cut their hair.
2 Wear a tie.
3 Use Windows daily.

[nauthiz]

MS Access talks (programmatically) with Excel which talks with Word which talks with Windows. You just can’t get that with any other operating system.
Sure you can. In fact, I wouldn't even say Windows is particularly stellar in this respect; just middle-of-the-road. It beats most Unixes (including Linux) hands-down because there isn't really a coherent high-level standard on that platform, but it's way behind some other environments I've worked in such as OS X and BeOS. Part of the problem on Windows is that for a long time Microsoft kept bringing out a new IPC scheme every few years rather than coming up with one solid design and sticking with it, which makes life hard for application developers. It's a bit like how Apple makes life hard for people who make iPod peripherals because they keep changing all the plugs and jacks.

[WHarris]

(Oh, and if you remove the bluetooth, wimax, better video card, blu-ray, and SSD, it drops to $1850, and then it is comparable to the macbook as far as components are concerned)


Actually, your less than the MacBook specs, as they come with bluetooth and WiFi standard.

[Tensor]

I know the basement hackers tout the virtues of other operating systems and browsers but they still have a Windows machine. And once they have to grow up and hold down a real job they do three things.
1 Cut their hair.
2 Wear a tie.
3 Use Windows daily.

Interesting take. I recently got laid off from a "real job" and I let my hair and beard grow, quit wearing a tie, and quit using Windows. As a result of all this, I "working" much less, doing much better financially, and enjoying life a lot more.

[Arneb]

Interesting take. I recently got laid off from a "real job" and I let my hair and beard grow, quit wearing a tie, and quit using Windows. As a result of all this, I "working" much less, doing much better financially, and enjoying life a lot more.

Interesting take! :)

Funny enough, I had one of those "Open source running against the wall" experiences today. Someone from my dept. had prepared a talk in a very low level Powerpoint peresentation. Black text on white, basically. No frills, no fancy animation, just, you know, facts in black and white. No hospital notebook was available, so I brought along an old machine running Win2k and Open Office (which I bought used on ebay for just such an occasion). He however had written his pp with the shiny newest pp version, and my OOo release predated that by more than a year. Ergo, "wrong version", and no talk. Quckly installing a version of MS' pp reader that also predated the new release did no good either (although the presenter swore every oath that he had hit an options button ordering pp to retain compatibility with previous versions). We parted without having heard he talk (on chronic diarrhea incidentally), and 20 min of precious hospital time had been wasted...

Had I but been running Office 97 on the old clipper (doesn't cost the world anymore anyway), maybe I would now be enlightened on the diagnosis and treatment of always teh runz.

[tdvance]

MS Access talks (programmatically) with Excel which talks with Word which talks with Windows. You just can’t get that with any other operating system.

Kind of like how OpenOffice Base, Calc, Writer (and Draw and Math) are programmatically integrated, and the suite is free and available on Linux, Solaris, and Windows, and probably Mac OS too--instead of being available for just one platform. It's also open source so if it were important to do so, a company could customize it through the source for their needs. It is also backward-compatible with more versions of MS Office than the latest version of MS Office is! Also, if you have a real problem with a document and are frustrated with the interface (which happens a lot with GUI software on all platforms), just save as XML and use XEmacs to fix it. The latest MS Office lets you save as XML now, but last I heard, some fields are still proprietary binary and not editible.

OpenOffice used to be StarOffice, written by Sun Microsystems for the Suns, and (I admit, this might be why they don't do so well profit-wise) they gave away the source to the public, resulting in OpenOffice.