"As desktop Linux becomes ever more professional, and with Microsoft still a year away from shipping its new Vista version of Windows, could now be the time to go open-source on the desktop? Of course, circumstances will vary from company to company, but if you're ready to make the move, there's a good crop of Linux distributions ready to accommodate your needs."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-09-02
You're generalizing your argument away. I agree that often getting some of these things working in "Linux" (Linux being a rather generic term for any number of different distros with different capabilities) can be a real mission. But, similarly, it can be a real mission in Windows. Regardless of what you're using, you're quite likely to need some instructions somewhere. That's the nature of the computing world.
The truth is that if you go out and buy hardware which isn't supported by Linux, and then try to get it working, you're going to be SOL. But if you do your homework and buy hardware which is supported, in many cases you will have to do very little to get things working. For instance, to address your specific examples, I know that if you use a dualhead GeForce, an HP PSC1210 and a Genius DV610 G-Shot camera, the dual-screen config can be set up in a couple of clicks in Ubuntu by installing the nvidia binary drivers (enabling the correct repository is also a couple of clicks); the printer/scanner can be set up by installing the correct utility from the repos (this was the most finnicky, but by no means difficult due to the vast wealth of resources on the ubuntu forums); and the camera will Just Work(TM). I've never tried getting wifi working, but I know for a fact that certain wireless cards work automagically with Ubuntu. Neither have I tried bluetooth synching, and I know nothing about it. What you meant about firewalls I'm not sure; software firewalls are easily installed and configured (installing Firestarter on Ubuntu is a lot easier than installing, say, ZoneAlarm on Windows, and Firestarter is a lot easier to use for a newbie in my opinion), and hardware firewalls are generally OS-agnostic.
Note that I focus specifically on Ubuntu, because that's what I use. Comparing Windows to "Linux" is really a bit disingenuous unless you specify which distro. I haven't used other distros for a while, so I can't comment on their capabilities.
Be that as it may, how many people need to set up all of the things you mention? I certainly don't, and the other Ubuntu machines I've set up and administer for people don't either. Printing and scanning are usually needed. Multiple screens are pretty rare, as is wifi and bluetooth, and I've never come across a digital camera not working as they're generally just mass storage devices.
All that said, if you do need all the things that you say, and you find it hard to set up in Linux and easy on Windows, then stick with Windows. It's obviously the best tool for the job in your case! I don't think any sane or reasonable Linux advocate would suggest that Linux is always better!
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:
2005-08-31
never attack pro-linux. Even if you're right, you're surely wrong.
Desktop config is a pain in linux. Sure I can claim otherwise and try to impress your friend with what I can do in the terminal editing files, compile x, a read howto one two three. But thinking that configuring linux desktop is easy (multiple screen, bluetooth sync with pda/cellphone, wi-fi sharing, scanner, printer config, firewall, digital camera, etc...), is completly illusory.
Not that I cannot configure what I said, but there is a line between "just working" and proving you are a ranked übergeek.
The other classical comment: The guys who used it is a *!%$/!**! (put what you want).
Bravo! This is exactly what make a system better.