Microsoft launches new preWindows7 anti-Linux offensive

[jimbo45]

Hi there
I like linux too -- I use a Linux server for all sorts of purposes - especially as a file and printer server, multimedia streaming , my Internet gateway and firewall which means I can leave out things like firewalls and AV software on the windows box which speeds it up no end.

However it's not as easy to get all the bits working -- you do need a certain amount of knowlege and be prepared to put up with a bit of "Trial and Error".

A Customised Linux system will IMO always run rings around a Windows system - but that's the whole point - Windows will nearly always work "straight out of the box" for the large majority of people who just take their machine home, unpack it and switch it on.

Windows is EXCELLENT at what it does - Linux is also excellent at what it does as well -- but these are really OS'es designed for different purposes.

When the "average joe" buys a computer the installed OS is not a significant part of the cost in any case. As Windows images can be installed by OEM's very easily on 1000's of machines its cheaper in any case for the OEM to supply a machine with Windows on it.

Once you get into the realms of Linux you have to think of Distros, kernel releases, software management packages etc etc.

Many applications whilst they work fine with one distro don't work with another one or or have to be compiled from source.

Upgrading software on most Linux systems is STILL not for the fainthearted -- some progress is being made but its still not like Windows update.

I and loads of people on this board are quite happy to spend the extra time with Linux systems to get them to run properly but your typical user won't do this -- and just imagine the chaos a user can cause on a Linux system if he types sudo rm - r / or other commands like that.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[pparks1]

However it's not as easy to get all the bits working -- you do need a certain amount of knowlege and be prepared to put up with a bit of "Trial and Error".

Over the past few years, my Ubuntu installs have worked pretty much flawlessly out of the box on my custom built boxes at home and my Dell E6400 laptop (even the wireless).

Many applications whilst they work fine with one distro don't work with another one or or have to be compiled from source.

Most of the applications that a general user is going to use is going to be included within the distributions repositories. So, for something like Ubuntu, you just open the Synaptic package manager, search for it, select it and it installs.

Upgrading software on most Linux systems is STILL not for the fainthearted -- some progress is being made but its still not like Windows update.

I disagree. On average machines with average hardware....the update process is drop dead simple. Ubuntu automatically scans for updates, tells you when they are available and installs just as easily as Windows update. With some distros, I have experienced problems with updates...but with other distros I've had very few issues. And with distros like Ubuntu, I pick the Nividia driver for my video card and and install that restricted driver and whenever I do my updates, Ubuntu takes care of making sure the kernel module is there. I've never had to manually fix my Nvidia drivers under Ubuntu

In fact, I usually love these package manager systems as you can get 95% of the software that you want from 1 place. Don't have to search all over the net and download packages. I'd love the ability to go into Add Remove Programs and check boxes for 7zip, open office, vlc, mse, mysql, apache, etc and just have it installed all in 1 shot...with the latest compatible versions.


Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that most people should switch over to Linux. I think the majority of Windows users are quite satisfied with their experience. But I also don't find many Linux distros as daunting as some people like to make out for simple user tasks.

 

[jimbo45]

Hi there.

the problem is if you are an OEM - what Linux distro would you ship -- you certainly wouldn't want to ship machines with different distros -- your customer service would be inundated with calls from day 1.

Also you'd have to obtain and build the installation disks.

This also is likely to confuse the average user -- one would have to chose Ubuntu, SUSE / Novell, Fedora, Mandriva or Red Hat as the main ones but there are a load of others.

With Windows - its simple - MS just sends the OEM package out - job done.

Whilst things like ubuntu are certainly MUCH easier than they used to be I think the problems of large OEM's supplying pre-installed Linux systems for the general user is not likely to happen simply for cost / manpower effort - even though the OS and apps are in the main open source (and hence free).

The only exceptions you'll find is when say someone like Dell has a contract to supply say a Local authority with 500 machines with Linux pre-installed.

MS is really barking up the wrong tree here in ranting against Linux -- W7 is good enough to stand up in its own right.

(Slightly OT - but there will be a general election in the UK soon -- I'm currently on contract here - but I hope that each major party will set out its own stall and not spend the whole time slagging off their opponents -- I only bring this up because this whole bash of MS against linux seems to be just that - instead of extolling W7's features just bash the opposition --100% negative campaigning and is usually never effective).

anyway time for a final beer and bedtime -- Monday AM working again.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[TheSchaft]

IMHO (and nobody asked I know) *inux is just coming out of the "shade tree mechanic" mode - they are still like PCs were with DOS back in the day, to a large extent.

I've said it before, and will say it again - most people want a computer to be an appliance, like a toaster. *inux, of any flavor, is not there yet - close, but still no cigar.

[Before I start a war here, a guy I knew in CA could program BSD flavors so good his sticky bit was taken away after he embarassed the Free BSD folk, so I'm not against Unices by any means - I am in awe of what a good C pusher can do. (Matt Dillon is his name - man that guy could code - built a non-forking web server in a weekend when Netscrape was still in diapers.)]

I have Ubuntu, "Jaunty Jackalope", on my old laptop. I like it. It has a nice package manager. I can connect to my router with it. I can use FF and Opera to go to (most) sites.

Connect to the home network that's running Windows 7? Connect to the NAS? Ummmm... not so much. I'm sure there is a way, but why bother? Windows 7 finds and connects automagically, and that is the key.

Joe Sixpack just wants the freaking thing to work. He doesn't care how, or why - just let him send email to Momma and surf for pictures of .... flowers.

Finally, and please bear with me for a moment - Imagine you're running a business. Would you want your IT guy to offer to put "Jaunty Jackalope" on your desktops, or would you go for something called Windows 7?

 

[ceejay]

Given the amount of vitriol spouted by Linux users against MS over the years, I really don't begrudge them having a pop back.

This move is undoubtedly because Linux Netbooks are making it into the mainstream. MS has every right commercially to try to point out the flaws of its competitor to buyers, particularly the type of buyer who uses the shop retail sector this initiative is aimed at.

This clearly isn't aimed at current Linux users (who would never dream of buying their hardware in Walmart anyway!), but at the sort of people brought up only to know Windows who may be tempted to move to Linux due to price concerns etc. Quite clearly Linux is still way behind in the user experience stakes for this sort of user.

The sort of person who inhabits this forum however is much more likely to appreciate that Linux is better than Windows in certain 'specialised applications'.

 

[Night Hawk]

One of the things I pointed to before was how you can use Linux for various applications while still needing a bit more experience for things other then the updates seen gui wise for the typical user.

Mandriva, Fedora, and a few other distros suit the server end there while the smaller live distros like ubuntu, Puppy, and even a bit larger now Knoppix can actually serve as data recovery tools when a Windows installation is down for some reason. If you can boot from a cd, dvd, or flash drive you have access to MS primaries whether Fat 16, 32, or NTFS while booted live.

There's a couple of older references that go into details on how that can be done. The first and oldest was before Knoppix grew in size now requiring a blank dvd or larger flash drive for live application seen at Computer First Aid Using Knoppix

For ubuntu while that along with the newer Puppy releases can also see right onto MS partitions the ubuntu documentation explains how data recovery can be seen as well as 3rd party sources. https://help.ubuntu.com/community/DataRecovery

Another source also covers lost and inaccesible data recovery which is actually more of a threat to 3rd party data recovery softwares sales then to Windows sales seen at Linux Ubuntu | Lost and Inaccessible Data Recovery

 

[pparks1]

the problem is if you are an OEM - what Linux distro would you ship -- you certainly wouldn't want to ship machines with different distros -- your customer service would be inundated with calls from day 1.

Yes, this would be a very tough thing on the OEM's. Not to mention, Linux distros do come out all of the time...so their inventory and shipping systems would be changing all of the time.

The average person who might use Linux would also have to have somebody like me come over and install it for them and show them the ropes for a bit. But the average person...like my neighbor, wouldn't be able to re-install Windows either.

IMHO (and nobody asked I know) *inux is just coming out of the "shade tree mechanic" mode - they are still like PCs were with DOS back in the day, to a large extent.

And as a Linux fan, I don't see it really ever coming out of this stage completely. That's the beauty of the system is that you can have it any way you want it. That's a very different philosophy than Windows which you can have the way that MS wants you to have it. For most people, they accept this and just move on and use the computer. But for the Linux community, the passion to create unique and individualized distros is not going to die down and nobody is going to agree on 1 standard. And personally, I don't see anything wrong with that.

Connect to the home network that's running Windows 7? Connect to the NAS? Ummmm... not so much. I'm sure there is a way, but why bother? Windows 7 finds and connects automagically, and that is the key.

And sadly enough...the level of automagic configurations is the primary reason why Windows has so many vulnerabilities. Far too many Windows "server admins" out there who click around and manage to get a web server, mail server or SQL server configured who know absolutely nothing about security it, applying patches or keeping it running efficiently. Fortunately with Linux hosts, you don't usually just "accidentally" get something to work. Instead, you have to read a bit about it, learn how to do it, and usually in the end you are better equipped to troubleshoot and support it.

Joe Sixpack just wants the freaking thing to work. He doesn't care how, or why - just let him send email to Momma and surf for pictures of .... flowers.

You know, I happen to live next door to "Joe Sixpack", and he comes over every now and then with all kinds of unexplained problems on his computer. I go over and look at it, and he's got all kinds of stuff installed that he claims, "I didn't install", or "that just showed up one day". Or he says, "hey I got this email and I clicked this link and then I got this error and now everytime I do X...Y happens". So much for the beauty of the stuff which "automagically" happens.

Finally, and please bear with me for a moment - Imagine you're running a business. Would you want your IT guy to offer to put "Jaunty Jackalope" on your desktops, or would you go for something called Windows 7?

I'd fire any IT guy that referred to the OS by the codename...that IT guy would say, I'm going to install Ubuntu...which doesn't sound any different than Windows. Of course, going on that example, that same IT guy, wouldn't install Windows 7...he would be installing either "blackcomb" or "vienna"

 

[Night Hawk]

Dell's option for "selecting your OS" narrows that down since you specify what OS will be included when ordering direct through them not when simply buying at a store or ordering from a 3rd party vendor. This was one thing they started back when Vista was first released as a result of the initial reactions to the then latest version to combat loss of sales on new units.

 

[bobtran]

Dell...nope

Dell actually does sell a laptop with Ubuntu installed.

~Lordbob

That's one more available. Good research....I should have remembered that Dell offers one and tigerdirect.com offers a few with ubuntu ( as apposed to more than 300 new windows machines not including refurbished Windows PC's), however, I think my point about availability has been validated.

I am not trying to tell anyone what OS they should or should not use, I am just pointing out that the market is rather closed and that people actually don't make the choice of Windows over Linux as most not technical users have never heard of Linux much less having been offered the option when they purchase their new pc's.

Even more...if Linux is brought up by the potential customer, the sales staff at Best Buy will try to talk you out of Linux as will Dell and all of the other manufacturers. There is a definite bias in the industry towards Windows which translates to out of sight out of mind mentality where the average pc user is concerned.

 

[Night Hawk]

One thing you missed there was the fact that Windows comes out when on schedule every 2-3yrs. with the next version except for the Vista delay which the 7 onto 8 should bring back the MS time table no less. Various and even some possible new distros on the other hand see this or that one have a new release in six months or less at times?

"Hey i just bought this ubuntu system last month and it's already outdated!" would be how that would end up if Linux was preinstalled on 30% or more new systems without buyer's request there! That's where Dell got smart while lacking in other areas!

 

[praseodeveloper]

I must say. With money, comes comfort. If you are willing to pay for your OS, you may enjoy all the features marked in green.
Else, compromise on your requirements from a desktop OS and use linux.
I personally feel that video chat, playing high end games, getting support etc in Linux is a (PITA). This situation has been prevailing for almost a decade. As not many fund such projects, they simply do not come into existence.

 

[bobtran]

One thing you missed there was the fact that Windows comes out when on schedule every 2-3yrs. with the next version except for the Vista delay which the 7 onto 8 should bring back the MS time table no less. Various and even some possible new distros on the other hand see this or that one have a new release in six months or less at times?

"Hey i just bought this ubuntu system last month and it's already outdated!" would be how that would end up if Linux was preinstalled on 30% or more new systems without buyer's request there! That's where Dell got smart while lacking in other areas!

This would be a problem EXCEPT for the fact that Ubuntu offers the "LTS desktop" (currently 8.04) that is supported for 3 years at a time which for this version is from April 2008 and maintained until April 2011 at which time it will be replaced with the highest stable version available for the next three year LTS desktop.

As for upgrading its not that hard. When an upgrade is available Ubuntu update manager (which runs automatically) also presents you with the next version and all you have to do is click "Upgrade". Your current installed OS gets upgraded like a patch using the installed OS to configure the system, software and security or you ignore the offer and just apply the patches to the current level of the OS. Simple and strait forward...anyone can do it.

 

[Night Hawk]

The interesting part about the 3yr. support is that I've already gone through the 6.04, 6.10, 7.04, 7.10, 8.04, 8.10, and now have the 9.04 presently on in less time then that!

With MS on the other hand once they get back to their 2-3yr. schedule for each new version about the time it takes to plan out the next build. XP is still seeing some degree of support after a full 8yr. stretch while SP3 will be the last service pack however.

One of the things that will tend to keep people running Windows is the latest MS move into portable devices like the new Windows mobile phone! MS is working along with the manufacturers keeping the foot in the door so to speak with each new innovation making them the enticement to stay MS.

Linux on the other hand for the longest time held the "Geek's OS" title since it took a bit work to management until the more recent releases came along again seemingly leaning more towards a more Windows familiar type of user experience.

 

[bobtran]

The interesting part about the 3yr. support is that I've already gone through the 6.04, 6.10, 7.04, 7.10, 8.04, 8.10, and now have the 9.04 presently on in less time then that!

With MS on the other hand once they get back to their 2-3yr. schedule for each new version about the time it takes to plan out the next build. XP is still seeing some degree of support after a full 8yr. stretch while SP3 will be the last service pack however.

One of the things that will tend to keep people running Windows is the latest MS move into portable devices like the new Windows mobile phone! MS is working along with the manufacturers keeping the foot in the door so to speak with each new innovation making them the enticement to stay MS.

Linux on the other hand for the longest time held the "Geek's OS" title since it took a bit work to management until the more recent releases came along again seemingly leaning more towards a more Windows familiar type of user experience.

I tend to agree about upgrading Linux more often and I am also running 9.04 on my Linux box. However....an earlier post I quoted was talking about the average user who does not upgrade their OS regularly and this is the person/business that would want the LTS version of Ubuntu 8.04.

I'm not so convinced about Windows mobile...I will be taking a wait and see attitude about it. Microsoft has been raving about their mobile OS and it never seems to live up to the hipe so far.

 

[Night Hawk]

Windows on a cell phone? I tend to be a skeptic as well about twitter and texting on phones while not surprized to see MS in competition with the IPhone no doubt. You couldn't imagine someone else having a monopoly there could you?

The one thing and probably why it continues to live on about Linux is simply that it remains an open source OS to start with. Once something new is submitted you see a new release available. Plus you have to consider the larger variety of flavors seen with that OS for different applications.

Vista introduced the Starter and Basic editions there to expand their selection of editions until that sort of fell out. To reach into developing markets Linux already has more of a foothold being a free open source OS. Those were the MS avenues seen there. MS has the "edition best for you" while Linux offers the "flavor of month" as many refer to it as.

 

[SevenAndSeven]

With my Windows 7 upgrade, I started using Ubuntu 9.04 in a VMWare installation. Super combination! I need Linux for development, I run the MySQL on Windows 7. In this age, you mix and match the best for your needs, thanks to choice and VMs and VPSs.

(As an aside, I've been having a stubborn problem on my Win7 with networking flaking out every 4-6 days without reboot, ie sluggish networking from all browsers, but Ubuntu on VM browses just fine. Go figure.)

 

[Night Hawk]

Presently I have to back up the virtual HDs for the portable VBox since Knoppix fails to start plus the newer version of that has been put onhold for a bit. The Konqueror browser is preferred there over Ice or FF but only seen with that distro.

The 9.04 and Puppy 4.2 still serve well for usb flash drive application since as long as a system supports booting from usb you can save files from a system that needs a drive wipe or runs into a large headache like a board or cpu giving out where you may not have a second machine around to save files from the main drive.

The Virtual Box also allows you to expore other OSs without even seeing any lasting effect on your main OS which for most here is 7! You won't have to worry about reformatting your hard drive since a vhd or other form of virtual HD is simply an expandable if not fixed file sitting on the drive instead.

 

[jimbo45]

Hi all

Seems that this is a "Horses for Courses" type of discussion.

Linux can be configured every which way (and is). You can boot from a USB stick or almost every imaginable device you can think of - but you have to WORK at it.

Networking in Linux just runs RINGS around Windows (just look at the problems you see on this board alone of people having trouble sharing XP / VISTA / W7 mixes of machines).

You can make Linux really small and lightning fast as you can individually customize this.

Windows however has to work "Out of the box" for 90% of users straight away with "acceptable" performance.

This of course is a problem - a user who just uses email / excel / word has very different requirements from a serious gamer or one who needs to measure the gases coming out of a test borehole on an Oil rig.

Whilst you CAN make Linux more like Windows that's not the point of the system -- if I want a Windows system what's wrong with the REAL THING.

Open Source doesn't always mean BTW "No Money". Just look at Red Hat and Novell - both make a LOT of money providing servers and services to business - using essentially an Open Source product (various flavours of Linux).

I wonder also how much toehold does MS have at places like CISCO. I'm sure 80% of the server / Internet infrastructure is still Linux based.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[wwoods]

Well, I like 7 and it will be my main OS, but for a "user friendly" GNU/Linux OS, Ubuntu can't be beat! The biggest problem is wireless on a laptop, but checking on compatibility before buying solves that issue.

I am sorry, why should I check to see if a $2500 laptop is compatiable with a OS, the OS should be the one that is made to work with the laptop. And yes, I have a 2500$ laptop, and as soon as linsux runs EVERY piece of software and EVERY piece of equipt out of the box, (not editing a config file here and there) , only then will I consider it on my system.

Untill then it is worthless to me.

 

[wwoods]

Linux can be configured every which way (and is). You can boot from a USB stick or almost every imaginable device you can think of - but you have to WORK at it.

Networking in Linux just runs RINGS around Windows (just look at the problems you see on this board alone of people having trouble sharing XP / VISTA / W7 mixes of machines).

And my windows boots from almost any device also, your point ? Hell I can even boot my windows from the 8g SD card in my blackberry......your point ?

And NO linux does not run rings around windows networking by any means, a LOT of that depends on the admin. I bet you most of those problems you so kindly point out as Windows are Admin issues.....

Get your facts strait