Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 17th Mar 2007 00:26 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu During my 8 years of Linux on and off usage I have tried more distros than I have chocolate bars. Each one of my previous encounters meant that I had to spend at least 2 days configuring before I have a desktop that I was somewhat comfortable with. With Ubuntu Feisty Fawn's latest test beta --for the first time ever-- this was not the case. I was up and running with all the niceties I wanted within 2 hours.
Thread beginning with comment 222206
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: What?
by lemur2 on Sat 17th Mar 2007 11:31 UTC in reply to "What?"
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

{ I am still just dumbfounded that someone could actually claim that Ubuntu is somehow easier to install AND more likely to support hardware than Windows XP/Vista.

...

However, to claim that Linux is "easier" to deal with than Windows Xp/Vista is just intellectually dishonest in every way.
}

Not at all. I have installed both OSes onto blank systems many many times.

Invariably the Windows install is far far more difficult ... even just for the bare OS install.

With a recent Linux liveCD install (such as PCLinuxOS, MEPIS or Ubuntu/Kubuntu) it takes just one (1) liveCD and perhaps 30 minutes, and you end up with a complete system plus desktop applications such as an Office suite (and it does not depend on the particular x86 system you have).

To get to the same state starting with the exact same blank system and a Windows install CD ... it will take far longer, it will require entry of many keys, several reboots and "activation" ... and you will need a lot of additional third-party CDs that are not from Microsoft, and many of them will be specific to the computer you are trying to install on. And after all that fuss you will still not have hardly any actual applications installed for all your effort.

Point out even one (1) incorrect fact in the above and you will win the prize.

Installing Linux (from nothing) is far, far easier than Windows. There is simply no question about it.

Edited 2007-03-17 11:39

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: What?
by lemur2 on Sat 17th Mar 2007 12:07 in reply to "RE: What?"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Perhaps replying to myself is a bit strange, but I have been accused of lying and intellectual dishonesty here, and I object strongly to that.

So, to back up what I am saying, here is a complete set of screenshots from an Ubuntu Edgy Eft install to hard disk from a liveCD:

http://www.debianadmin.com/ubuntu-edgy-eft-desktop-installation-wit...

If you have a blank system, you do not even have to worry about partitioning ... just accept the default (as you would for Windows install on a blank system).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: What?
by superstoned on Sat 17th Mar 2007 13:07 in reply to "RE[2]: What?"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

Well, imho you're entirely right. I don't understand how someone can honestly say linux is more complex than windows... Ok, in some area's, it can be. But in many, windows is just a mess compared to linux...

It does depend on what you try, on the apps, on the DE, but overall - linux is ahead.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: What?
by ride01 on Sat 17th Mar 2007 13:43 in reply to "RE: What?"
ride01 Member since:
2005-09-23

Invariably the Windows install is far far more difficult ... even just for the bare OS install.
With a recent Linux liveCD install ... it takes just one liveCD and perhaps 30 minutes..


Installation time is the same.

To get to the same state starting with the exact same blank system and a Windows install CD ... it will require entry of many keys

Windows requires only one key.

several reboots

You can get free operating system updates if you choose to. This is also true of every other OS, including Linux. Doing this is incredibly easy.

and "activation" ...

If connected to the internet, this occurs automatically when you enter your key. If not connected, you may have to call a free 1-800 number. This could be seen as an annoyance.

However, it is not "difficult" to do this. The GUI tells you exactly what to do. Activation could be seen as annoying, but not difficult.

plus desktop applications ... Office suite

The only application you mentioned was an Office Suite. OpenOffice is very easy to download for Windows if one chooses to. I typed "free office" into Google and got this: http://tinyurl.com/3xya55

More importantly, if one chooses to purchase and install Microsoft Office, this as an incredibly easy process as well.

It is almost always far more difficult to seek out and install software on Linux than it is on Windows.

and you will need a lot of additional third-party CDs that are not from Microsoft

Why?

and many of them will be specific to the computer you are trying to install on.

I'm not sure I understand this. I think I once bought a CD drive that came with a free OEM copy of Nero, though. ;)

And after all that fuss you will still not have hardly any actual applications installed for all your effort.

I didn't see any "fuss" noted, save the entering of a single CD key. You will have a very good email program, internet browser, MP3-enabled audio player, video player, and many, many other programs needed for normal computer use.

Your computer will "just work", as well. You will be able to do simple OPERATING SYSTEM tasks such as changing your monitor's resolution and refresh rate. You will be able to listen to MP3's, your network/wifi will work, and video card hardware acceleration will work.

Linux is just more difficult to get working than Windows. Because I make this statement, does NOT mean that I think "Linux sucks" or even that "Windows is better". I LIKE Linux, and I want it to progress. It has progressed EXPONENTIALLY in just the last few years.

Edited 2007-03-17 13:52

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: What?
by lemur2 on Sat 17th Mar 2007 15:06 in reply to "RE[2]: What?"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

{If connected to the internet, this occurs automatically when you enter your key. If not connected, you may have to call a free 1-800 number. This could be seen as an annoyance. }

It is more than an mere annoyance. This *cough* feature combined with WGA, if someone else uses your key or installs some malware it is possible that you will be locked out of your own computer!

{ and you will need a lot of additional third-party CDs that are not from Microsoft

Why?

and many of them will be specific to the computer you are trying to install on.

I'm not sure I understand this. }

Obviously you have never installed Windows on a blank machine.

You will likely need a separate install CD (other than the Windows disk) for each of: your printer, your video card and your sound. It is possible you will need an install CD for your network card, and you certainly will if you have a wireless connection. You might even need a CD or other media for something as simple as your modem, your mouse or your monitor!

{ I didn't see any "fuss" noted, save the entering of a single CD key. }

That is not accurate. If you put in just the Windows CD (and only the Windows CD) and one key, you are likely to have VGA-resolution video, no 3D acceleration, and no sound. You may not have any network card, and you won't have any wireless. You certainly won't be able to print anything. If you do get connected to the net, you would be compromised in less than a few minutes without a decent firewall and virus scanner. You won't get any significant applications without entering yet more keys.

{ Your computer will "just work", as well. }

Typically, no it will not. Not right away. Not without feeding in half-a-dozen extra CDs (apart from the Windows CD, and each extra driver CD specific to your hardware), and you will utterly bork your system if you put in an install CD for the wrong motherboard, or something like that.

Typically, however, it will "just work" after installing a modern Linux from an install CD.

{ You will be able to do simple OPERATING SYSTEM tasks such as changing your monitor's resolution and refresh rate. }

No. Sorry, typically that is not so. On Windows, you will have to get the install CD from the manufacturer of your video card, and install the drivers from there, before you can do this.

On Kubuntu, PCLinuxOS and SuSe Linux you can however do this very operation straight after the install from liveCD.

{ You will be able to listen to MP3's}

This is true also for PCLinuxOS. For Kubuntu and SuSe, you have to set an extra repository in your package manager. Even if you have to do this, i is far easier to do than the half-dozen extra CDs and phonecall to Microsoft that are required for a successful Windows install on to a blank machine.

{ your network/wifi will work, and video card hardware acceleration will work }

Typically, no they won't. All of these typically each require additional install disks (other than the Windows CD) before they will work. If you happen to get the wrong CD (say you have more than one machine, with a different motherboard or video card) then you will scramble the Windows install and you will have to start over again.

{ Linux is just more difficult to get working than Windows. }

Sorry, that is just not so. Unlike Windows, Linux is a one-disk install without any keys, activation steps, registration phone calls, or required additional components (lest it be compromised), and there is no threat of viruses or malware or failing WGA checks that will make it not work.

{ Because I make this statement, does NOT mean that I think "Linux sucks" or even that "Windows is better". }

Fine. Because you make that statement, doesn't make that statement correct, either. What you think is simply not relevant to the reality.

Edited 2007-03-17 15:24

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: What?
by oomingmak on Sat 17th Mar 2007 15:40 in reply to "RE: What?"
oomingmak Member since:
2006-09-22

"Invariably the Windows install is far far more difficult ... even just for the bare OS install."

I agree (and that's coming from a Windows user).

While Linux distos aimed at desktop users do still have many problems and annoyances, installation is certainly not one of them, and it has now reached the point where it is easier to install Linux than it is Windows (for default installations at least).

The one area that I personally do find lacking is the section for specifying mount points. This could be made much more user friendly and intelligible, because even Linux beginners sometimes want to specify what goes where (to be sure that existing data does not get touched).

But other than that, I'd say they have the installation problem pretty much licked.

Edited 2007-03-17 15:46

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: What?
by kristoph on Sat 17th Mar 2007 17:01 in reply to "RE: What?"
kristoph Member since:
2006-01-01

I am sorry lemur2 but I have to disagree (and agree with the parent). I also have experience with installing Windows 2000 / XP, Linux (Slackware / RHEL / Ubuntu), and Max OS X.
Needless to say Mac OS X is by far the easiest. Windows 2000 / XP is much easier on random hardware than Linux. Linux is fine if all your hardware is supported by the distro 'out of the box' but if it's not the process of installing an configuring Linux is MUCH harder than Windows 2000 / XP.
]{

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: What?
by unoengborg on Sat 17th Mar 2007 21:36 in reply to "RE[2]: What?"
unoengborg Member since:
2005-07-06

I think installation is hard for any OS when the hardware isn't supported by the installation media.
I would say that windows would be harder than most in this situation.

The reason why MacOS-X is easy to install. Apple controls the hardware, so you are at least very likely to get the installed system to boot right away.

Linux supports more devices out of the box than any version of Windows, so statistically, installation on Linux should be easier on random hardware.

However, Linux usually have difficulties with brand new hardware as drivers are often developed after that the device have hit the market due to lack of information from the hardware vendor.

So if you "randomly" select your hardware from new devices you may be right, in that, Linux is harder to install. On the other hand, if you buy a new PC, then why not buy hardware that you know works.

When you judge what OS is the most difficult to get installed, you also have to factor in at what software that actually gets installed. In windows you end up with notepad and paint. In Linux you usually end up with a full office suit, a fairly good image editor and if you check a check box or two more, over the default install, you will also have a mail server, and a very good enterprise level database.

Reply Parent Score: 3