Give me a reason.

[MYK]

I have my X61s which I love and use as my main laptop. I have recently bought a T42p to try out FlexView, something that I wanted to do forever. Should I instal Ubuntu Gutsy on it or leave it as it is? I experimented with a friend's machine and loved it, I will be missing a few things without XPP and will waive good bye to gaming. By the way, any chance of COD4 with the T2?

I need a better reason on why I should do this and is it really that good/fun?

[K-lite]

Different people have different reasons for using Linux over XP.

I think it all comes down to what is the main purpose of your PC? and the capability of the OS that you need?

I have a T41 which i only use for Web Browsing, Multimedia, Word Processing, and some image editing. Both Windows and Linux can do the same tasks perfectly, but i chose Linux (Fedora ) over XP for these simple reasons:

1- Cost
2- Stability
3- Security
4- GUI

Yes, having Linux is really really fun. There is no limit to what you can do with your system. All what you need is spare time and some learning ( if Linux is new to you). Ubuntu is one of the hugely supported Distros. and very stable once you get everything working. I had problems myself on the T41 only but ran perfectly on another Laptop.

As for Call of Duty 4, go to this site http://www.systemrequirementslab.com and click on "Can you run it?" it will require an ActiveX but it's safe to do it. I should say you should be on Windows when you go there.

***** You can dual boot between XP and Ubuntu, and have XP for games only.


All the best

[jdhurst]

<snip>
2- Stability
3- Security
<snip>

I agree totally to use whatever you wish. Really no one else cares. The post I snipped was also very good.

However, Windows is perfectly stable. From the time I started running NT4 workstation in 1999 through Windows 2000 and Windows XP Pro, I have not ever had a crash related to software. (Hardware crashes affect any OS). You CANNOT get more stable than this. Linux may well be stable, but it is NOT more stable than Windows.

I secure my systems. I don't get viruses and never have, and I have never been hacked. No rootkits on my machines (I have checked) and no problems. Again, Linux may well be secure, but so also is Windows equally secure (assuming you take steps to secure both).

So anyone considering switching to any other OS need not leave behind the system that works best for them. ... JDH

[whizkid]

Being a big fan of Linux (Fedora is my flavor too), I have to agree with JD WRT stability. Win98 and earlier were not great, but I found W2K and especially XP to be extremely reliable. I was startled last month when I got a blue screen on XP - my first ever, using XP daily for years, and it was a hardware issue.

I wouldn't be as kind as JD on security. Windows has to be secured from malicious web sites and e-mail viruses and Linux doesn't. I do secure my Windows and Linux machines with firewalls and address-translating routers, but if I get a Windows virus on Linux, it just doesn't run. That doesn't make Linux inherently more secure, it's just de facto more secure. I expect that to change as more malware gets written for Linux. In my experience, vulnerabilities are fixed more quickly for Linux, usually much more quickly.

MYK, I can't tell you why you should run Linux, but I can tell you why I like and use Linux.

- people very much like me are putting effort into the software and we all get benefit from that for free.
- new features and software technology get put into Linux all the time and upgrading is free and easier than with Windows.
- I decide what runs on my hardware and how it operates.
- I can look at and change the code (doesn't apply to non-programmers).
- I put fewer dollars in Microsoft's pocket (a convicted monopolist) by not buying Office, Money, or any of their other originally-named products and once I can buy a ThinkPad with Linux or no OS a little more easily, I'll do that too.

But all that wouldn't mean much if Linux were a toy. It can do everything Windows can if software is written for it, and it can run a lot of Windows software too. Sadly, most new games don't work on Linux.

Since my T60 came with Windows, I do have Vista installed, and I played some Tron 2.0 on it recently, but about all I do with Vista is boot it, install the latest updates, test hardware if something seems odd with Linux, and boot right back into Linux.

My older machines (600X, 570E, 750P) are all running just Linux in some form.

[rm]

I have my X61s which I love and use as my main laptop. I have recently bought a T42p to try out FlexView, something that I wanted to do forever. Should I instal Ubuntu Gutsy on it or leave it as it is? I experimented with a friend's machine and loved it, I will be missing a few things without XPP and will waive good bye to gaming. By the way, any chance of COD4 with the T2?

I need a better reason on why I should do this and is it really that good/fun?

Here are my reasons for using Linux:

http://temporaryland.wordpress.com/2007 ... use-linux/

[jdhurst]

I read your article carefully. I have Windows every bit as secure as Linux (article point knocked out). I have complete control over everything. There isn't much anymore I don't know about XP or how to get around it (article point knocked out). The rest of the points are valid, although Linux has never stepped up to the bar and run the critical business software I need without some sort of workaround or emulator. I like my primary software to run natively which I can do in Windows but not in Linux. Yes, I pull up my Linux machines occasionally and play around. I think it a highly decent system, although more geared to technical people (and I play in that sandbox occasionally myself). ... JDH
'

[ditkuss]

I'll give you a few reasons:

1. XP is outdated, we're talking about 7 years old. Gutsy Gibbon is brand new, only three months old. Also, the update procedure is way easier on Ubuntu.

2. XP is expensive, Ubuntu is free including all extra software that you may need and painless updates.

3. Staying with XP keeps you locked to Microsoft. Get yourself off XP now while you still have a chance, otherwise it's going to be that same excuse about how you can't switch because you need that one little program that only works in XP or Vista.

[jdhurst]

<snip> otherwise it's going to be that same excuse about how you can't switch because you need that one little program that only works in XP or Vista.

One little program! That one had me laughing for an hour!

... JDH

[ajkula66]

All jokes aside, consider dual-boot...at least for the time being. Not everyone will end up liking Linux, and that's perfectly fine.

Try out different distros. Follow your gut on what you find appealing or not at the first sight...play around for a while...have fun

My favourite Linux for dual-booting on T42p was SuSE Professional 9.2 but to each his own...works right out of the box, at least everything I've been interested in...

[carbon_unit]

(snip)
although Linux has never stepped up to the bar and run the critical business software I need without some sort of workaround or emulator. I like my primary software to run natively which I can do in Windows but not in Linux.
(snip)

I don't think it is Linux who has not stepped up to the bar, but it is the software companies. So far they have not seen a large enough user base to port their apps to Linux but it is growing every day and at some point they will see a large enough market in Linux for their products. When the big software companies start porting to Linux, Linux use will expand more rapidly. Some are starting to code for both now but they are small companies. The large companies will have a considerable expense in porting to Linux so they are still waiting. We are talking mainstream big name apps here not small obscure apps.

It is kind of a chicken or the egg thing. Which comes first, the product or the market for it? The market needs a product and the product will expand the market.
One of the allures of Linux is free software. Most apps for Linux are free. The software market see this and thinks most Linux users will not pay for their software (and they might be right) so why port to a market who won't pay for the product? It is not a good business investment.
It is going to take a progressive company with deep pockets to take the first step and port a major app to Linux. Then it will take the Linux community spending enough money purchasing the product to prove there is a market in commercial Linux apps. If that happens maybe the other large companies will jump in. Once the big apps are available the user base will grow.

All of this is unlikely to happen in the near future.

[rm]

One of the allures of Linux is free software. Most apps for Linux are free. The software market see this and thinks most Linux users will not pay for their software (and they might be right) so why port to a market who won't pay for the product? It is not a good business investment.
It is going to take a progressive company with deep pockets to take the first step and port a major app to Linux. Then it will take the Linux community spending enough money purchasing the product to prove there is a market in commercial Linux apps. If that happens maybe the other large companies will jump in. Once the big apps are available the user base will grow.

All of this is unlikely to happen in the near future.

There are two dangers for the big companies to avoid:

1) Porting their apps to Linux too soon.
This is a danger because it could be seen as loss in their balance sheet. On the other hand, once they do the port, subsequent ports will be much easier and therefore cheaper. This is especially the case if they use cross platform developer tools.

2) Porting their apps to Linux too late.
The top Application companies, like Adobe and Autodesk, have a fairly good lock on their respective markets. However, their competitors have an opportunity to take a good chunk of it away by being first to market in the new emerging Linux market. Once those application niches get more competitive, they will never be able to regain their current dominance.

Only these companies know when it will make sense for them to port their apps to Linux. I know that if Adobe or Autodesk had their products available for Linux, my company and several others I have worked for would switch to Linux immediately. The company I currently work for uses Bentley Microstation, and Autodesk competitor. This company is not afraid to try new products. If one of Autodesk's competitors would port to Linux, we would look at that product very carefully and seriously consider switching to it.

On a personal level, I like digital photography. Gimp does not satisfy my needs fr RAW processing (it lacks 16 bit per channel editing capability). I can get by with Cinepaint, which gives excellent results, but is clunky to use. So, I have paid for a license of Pixel Image Editor.

http://www.kanzelsberger.com/pixel/?page_id=12

Pixel is a great product (still in development) that already offers a very good set of tools. It certainly has what it takes to take a good chunk of Photoshop market's away. If you think you need Photoshop in Linux, do give Pixel a shot.

[goldenmunky]

If you have patience and willing to accept challenges, then Linux is the OS for you.