To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
You make some very good points - and I am not claiming that windows should have all of this software pre-installed. I also understand that most of this software is installed because of my own personal preferences.
I was, however, responding to the earlier post about Windows working perfectly out of the box (I believe the user mentioned being able to watch movies and listen to music) and how linux is not ready out of the box.
My post was meant to demonstrate that in many cases Windows is not ready "out-of-the-box" and that in some cases linux can actually be "more ready" for certain individuals.
A stock windows install CANNOT play DVDs, while certain linux distributions CAN directly after the install.
Obviously it goes without saying that getting linux to work with certain hardware can be very time consuming - I remember patching my kernel to get SATA sleep to work correctly - Locating the patch on the kernel mailing lists and emailing the original patch author took a while (and yes I do know how to use the patch utility, but the patch in its raw form in the mailing list wasn't formated correctly).
I personally like both OS's but to say that windows is ALWAYS more complete out of the box and will ALWAYS be is just naive. Windows XP is an old OS, when I install it on my think pad T43 it recognizes less hardware that Ubuntu!!
AW
I agree with your main/original point.
I guess we all hope there are no show stoppers when we try to install a new OS. A download is no big deal but having to root endlessly through forum chatter to find an obscure switch is no fun.
I think for many of us Windows XP is a nicely stable baseline OS, for now. If we want to extend it with more apps, or heavy usage, we do. If not, then we are probably newbies and are happy in our ignorance.
XP is not the be all and end all -- I've heard that OSX is, but I remain skeptical of it as it comes from Steve Jobs, a megalomaniac -- but it is more than good enough for most of us, and as techies we can solidly predict and handle its behaviors (good and bad) when we find it on 90% of our friend's or co-workers computers.
I've not wanted to leave Windows...yet. OSNews articles and discussions are a great daily read that helps me stay prepared in case Microsoft turns into Big Brother and I have to quickly choose one of the hundreds of FOS OS options.
--
Just-Think-It.com






Member since:
2005-09-04
I run Windows XP...and I had to install several pieces of software to play DVDs and Divx movies...Here is some of the software I had to install on Windows XP:
Note * denotes software (or equivalent) installed by default with most linux distributions.
1. Tinn (text editor)* (Notepad does not count)
2. VLC (Movie Player - including DVDs)*
3. OpenOffice*
4. QuickTime
5. FireFox*
6. CCleaner - (Cleaning application for all the crap that builds up in windows) (NA on linux)
7. Anti-Virus Software (BIG ONE) (NA on linux)
8. Ad-Aware (NA on linux)
9. Trillian (IM-Client)*
10. zFTPServer (FTP Server)*
11. TightVNC (VNC Server/client)*
12. TruCrypt (Encryption software)*
13. Netbeans IDE*
14. Thunderbird* (Outlook Express does not count)
15. Nero*
16. BitTorrent Client*
I have to install additional software on my new XP systems also, but I think the list above is not very "on point".
1. There are dozens if not hundreds of editors -- I don't mind what Windows ships with and use several Notepad sessions at a time -- but no one wants to see a dozen editor choices. This is not simpler for newbies and would still end up with unhappy power users.
2. Movie player -- this is an issue with most Linux OSes also and relates to $ on both platforms.
3. Office -- ok, MS charges for their's so they don't give it away. From what I've read, it is better than OOo. I guess you get what you pay for on this one.
4. QuickTime blows, frankly. Where did anyone get the idea this is good software? Almost as bad as Real player, and just as infrequently needed. I install neither and will rip out Real if it somehow gets in there.
5. Firefox, Maxthon, Opera, etc. -- again, does the average user want or need half a dozen browsers? I think not. I sure don't. I've tried the others and prefer IE. Weird, huh?
6. Not sure what this does, seems related to 8.
7. Free AV's are available, as are commercial ones. Again, choice rules. Personally I hate Symantec/Norton (bloatware & crap interface), tried McAfee for many years but after it got too bloated I moved to AVG. Small download, easy install, freely updates itself forever. No big deal here.
8. Ad-Aware or equiv. -- this is one of 3 or 4 programs I need to install on new machines. Free, small install, no big deal. When we get a new car we buy custom floor mats, maybe upgrade the stereo, stick a Jack-in-the-Box ball on the antenna -- is this worth commenting on?
9. Personal choice ware again -- I use YIM only so don't need or want Trillian.
10. thru 13. Have no place being listed here. Techieware (but I use CuteFTP and WS_FTP so don't want your choices littering my hardware, TYVM).
14. I like Eudora, having used it since version 1.something. I sure don't want Thunderbird, and the average user probably wants Outlook. So this is not worth a complaint.
15. I've never liked Nero and prefer Roxio. Besides, Nero is a huge install -- I wouldn't want it to be there and not be used.
16. Miniscule install. Install if needed. Not worth commenting on.
I could now list the dozen or more utilities that I prefer to have on my new systems, but I think you get the idea. A new OS is not supposed to be a new everything. In most cases mentioned above cost is not even an issue -- well, if you want it, download it -- no need to whine about it.