Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 13th Sep 2007 08:14 UTC, submitted by Anonymous Reader
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu "My verdict: Even in the relatively slick Ubuntu variation, Linux is still too rough around the edges for the vast majority of computer users", says Mossberg. Among others, he complains about one of the things I did too when I was writing my stream of Ubuntu reviews back in Spring.
Thread beginning with comment 270892
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: well
by Kroc on Thu 13th Sep 2007 08:58 UTC in reply to "well"
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

So rough that you can put a DVD into it and play it?
So rough that it plays MP3s out of the box?
So rough that it wakes up from sleep without problems?

Prey tell, what is so rough about Windows that makes it not "good enough"? It's badly designed, slow and a security nightmare in anything but a power user's hands, but it's certainly no where near as rough as Linux.

Safe mode video fallback, in 2007, nice. Been around since the Amiga
Hardware accelerated desktop effects, nice. Been around since 2001 on Mac.


Seriously; bashing Windows does not improve Linux, magically. All it will get you is Linux bashing back. Wise up, focus on the article, and the experience of the average user.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: well
by anda_skoa on Thu 13th Sep 2007 10:45 in reply to "RE: well"
anda_skoa Member since:
2005-07-07

So rough that you can put a DVD into it and play it?


Would be nice, but it doesn't. I have to install the WinDVD software that came with the DVD drive, otherwise no DVD watching.

So rough that it plays MP3s out of the box?


Yes, it can do MP3. Nice. Howeve, the problem is a lot bigger than on other platforms. In case you encountern an uninstalled codec, it is more likely that the download feature will actually fail to download it.

Almost everybody I know had to go through the extra hassle of installing yet-another-player software just because standard media player was not capable of fetching the respective DivX codec.

So rough that it wakes up from sleep without problems?


Would be nice if it would always be capable of this as well. Unfortunately it isn't. Fortunately if you have a comparable Linux installation, e.g. respective OEM image, it will.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[3]: well
by Coxy on Thu 13th Sep 2007 12:25 in reply to "RE[2]: well"
Coxy Member since:
2006-07-01

"Would be nice, but it doesn't. I have to install the WinDVD software that came with the DVD drive, otherwise no DVD watching. "

-- The point is, is that anyone buying a dell Linux computer will expect it to play mp3s since they get that functionality with windows computers from dell out of the box... that's the dell box. Not the geek-self-built box sitting on your desktop. Normal users buy their computers pre-built with everything ready made and installed, so yes, windows does ply dvd's put of the box. Normal users will expect the same from a Dell Linux.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: well
by Jack Burton on Thu 13th Sep 2007 11:38 in reply to "RE: well"
Jack Burton Member since:
2005-07-06

"So rough that you can put a DVD into it and play it? "

Windows XP can't play DVD out of the box. Unless it's a custom installation (OEM for example, but not even all OEMs installs the DVD codecs by default).

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: well
by dylansmrjones on Thu 13th Sep 2007 12:42 in reply to "RE: well"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Let's see... try to make Windows Media Player play Matroska movies properly when running as a normal user in XP (e.g. Limited User Account) or in Win2K3 Server (Restricted User Account).

Which is fastest? Googling for DirectShow codecs for Windows or using apt-get/synaptic to install the proper codecs for Linux?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: well
by phoenixt on Thu 13th Sep 2007 12:45 in reply to "RE[2]: well"
phoenixt Member since:
2006-09-01

What is more intuitive for the average user?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: well
by BluenoseJake on Thu 13th Sep 2007 17:12 in reply to "RE[2]: well"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

"Which is fastest? Googling for DirectShow codecs for Windows or using apt-get/synaptic to install the proper codecs for Linux?"

If you don't know the name of the codec you need to install, then you're googling either way.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: well
by cmost on Thu 13th Sep 2007 15:01 in reply to "RE: well"
cmost Member since:
2006-07-16

So rough that you have to spend a considerable amount of time securing the system so that it remains free of viruses and spyware...

So rough that every user has to be an Administrator in order to use certain features, run certain programs, or modify certain settings...

So rough that you're stuck with Redmond's vision of a desktop environment unless you shell out $$$ for Stardock's object dekstop & other theming enhancements...

So rough that if you upgrade too many components you have to call an MS representative and beg them to let you use what you already paid for...

So rough that most hardware you purchase has to have its driver CD inserted and proprietary software installed before the hardware will work...

Should I go on?

Both Windows and Linux have their good and their bad points. The informed user, however, questions and makes a decision based on what s/he's willing to put up .

Personally, I'll take Linux over Windows any day.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: well
by Redeeman on Thu 13th Sep 2007 21:47 in reply to "RE: well"
Redeeman Member since:
2006-03-23

but how many other things does ubuntu do out of the box? come to think of it? drivers.. lots of codecs, not having to pay money for antivirus and firewall crap, not seeing bsod, not having system automagically reboot when bsod'ing not to scare people, actually working, how about a nice shell, lots of apps preinstalled, pdf out of the box, usable browser out of the box, IM out of the box(yes, im that doesent suck), system tools out of the box, office tools..

you know, your out of box arguments are just plain crap, theres a shitload more things to do on a fresh winblows install than there is of even a gentoo.

so the real deal comes to this, linux is a hell of a lot faster, stabler, more secure, easy to use, logical..

just... get over it, winblows is a piece of shit, a bug in history.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: well
by leech on Thu 13th Sep 2007 23:24 in reply to "RE[2]: well"
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

just... get over it, winblows is a piece of shit, a bug in history.

Don't sugar coat it, tell us how you really feel ;)

I agree, you can't polish a turd, and that's what they tried with Vista.

Reply Parent Score: 2