Why Ubuntu (Still) Sucks - Part 1: Search

The argument that feature differences determine whether a system is good or bad misses what is the point for me; GNOME provides the features I need on cheaper hardware than I'd have to use to run Vista. I also happen to prefer the GNOME user experience to the Windows experience. There are myriad small differences that make me more productive working in GNOME than in Windows. A simple feature that really makes a difference is the ability to bookmark important directories to jump right to them as needed. GNOME is not windows. It doesn't need to have all the features that Windows has. If it was Windows-like, I would not use it.
-- Eric

I'm tired of you Vista whiners complaining about a any operating system that does't say Windoze. Ubuntu has been great for me and saved me $$$$. Here is my story:

My father-in-law's cheap emachine power supply died but before it did it toasted the motherboard (parts of it anyway such as USB and audio). I was able to use an older power supply boot linux from a live-cd, burn the necessary files from off his hard drive to cdrom (whereas Windows would not boot on the same machine) and he was happy I had rescued his data.

He wasn't ready for Linux for his own reasons (something about teaching an old dog new trick). But when he ordered a new machine from Dell he made damn sure it came with Windows XP. He didn't want Vista and all of the DRM crap that comes with it. He gave me his old computer case and whatever was in it.

I picked up a cheap AMD processor and mobo for under $100 dollars Canadian (which is worth more than it was 6 months ago). Installed FREE Ubuntu Linux on it and it detected all hardware correctly. I didn't have to purchase any thing from Microsnot!

Now I have a second computer- with DVD and CD burner that works great and I didn't buy an overpriced operating system that spends half its time monitoring what I am doing and getting in my way. Hasta la vista, baby! Hello Ubuntu 7.10!

So Gutsy sucks because you are having a tantrum over the search feature ROFLMAO. It works perfectly well for me. You people need to stop writing rubbish.

You are obviously an idiot. Even though you're comments do not dignify a response, I felt like dissing someone, and amazingly enough you popped up!

Bottom line: Microsoft is a monopolistic criminal organization that needs to be broken up or shut down. Ubuntu linux, for what's stacked up against it, is the simply the answer.

Enough said.

sir, would you like to tell anything else that is not in ubuntu , and it is in vista??

i will be waiting for you part two.

you did tell how vista how you can arrange folders view in vista, but i don;t understand how it related to search. (( does is search inside the file or what?? !! ) )
I also didn't understand what will you do with persistent dynamic search objects , that is created by it?

Randall Kennedy really SUCK
Randall Kennedy really SUCK
Microsoft REALLY SUCK

Your arguments seem to follow this logic: Ubuntu isn't like Vista, so it isn't worth my/your time. Well that's true, it isn't like Vista. If it was, people would be going back to XP after trying it. Then they'd be writing on and on about the horrors of "Ubuntu". And Canonical would be issuing press releases painting a rosy picture about how the number of installations of Ubuntu 7.10 have beaten 7.06. But then the press would point out the fabricated nature of such announcements.

So I'm looking forward to your "analysis" of Compiz-Fusion/Beryl. It should tell me everything I need to know about the short-comings of the Vista 3D interface.

You are such an ignorant bitch, shut the fuck up already. I hate people who have nothing nice to say!!! (including myself for writing this, but I think you're such an ass).

Cheers!

I've been a casual user of Ubuntu Linux for nearly two years now. I now refuse to waste money of crappy, grossly overpriced, bug-ridden, Microsoft bloatware that wastes system resources and delivers poor performance.

Hence I will not be installing Vista on any machine of mine and have already steer at least a couple of dozen clients and friends away from buying any machine with Vista on it. Vista is defective by design. It takes away a lot of control a computer user whould have over a machine and puts it in Microsloth's hands.

Windows 2K and XP bad enough, after many Service Packs and patches over the years. There is nothing worth doing on a Windoze box that Vista does that can't be don't on XP and probably 2K. Perhaps that is the reason major corporations are staying clear of Vista and MS is going to keep selling and attempting to support XP for longer than it ever planned to. Windows Vista is the new Windows ME.

Any writer who claims Vista is a good OS ought to learn a new trade, perhaps flipping burgers, since that is the sort of skill such an ignorant writer might actually be able to learn with a few years of practice.

With Ubuntu Linux running strictly FOSS apps, I can do anything a business person is likely to want to do and I won't have to experience frequent crashes, errors, and security flaws the way Winblows users do.

Plus Ubuntu Linux doesn't have crap like DRM, annoying activation requirements, and intrusive malware such as WGA.

Ubuntu Linux beats Vista hands down for most practical purposes. I suggest you go back to watching Teletubbies in your diapers and give up babbling about things you don't understand.

Yes, I have installed vista twice, and took it off twice, Vista is the reason I made the switch to linux.
As Vista came out two things were highlighted alot, Improved security, and the eye candy. Both are pale in compariston to Ubuntu. So I guess its how you compare Ubuntu and Vista, comparing its search abilities and declaring that Linux sucks because they are better than Ubuntu's is a weak argument.

Time will tell. One things for sure, no other Linux flavour has become more of a threat to Windows than any other. If things carry on this way, then in 10 to 15 years Windows will be the minority OS.

I myself tested Windows Vista & now own a copy of the ultimate edition. Without sounding confrontational I must say that I can abide to use it. In comparison to any Linux distribution that I've ever tried it is hugely unstable. I find that it often freezes or at best runs very slowly & this is on a fairly good machine (2gigs of RAM & an Athlon 64 3700+). The reality is that Vista is little more than a poorly designed resource hog that the majority of people will struggle with because it runs so ineffectively.

Obviously Ubuntu too is far from perfect but is stable & fast. What's more it can be run on a fairly low spec machine, which only adds to the savings. Also Ubuntu actually seem to try with their desktop releases with each one showing steady improvements & having been carefully thought through. Microsoft on the other hand have the security of monopoly & as a result can release all sorts of appalling products & still make reasonable sales. Sound familiar? Vista anyone?

I wonder what you'll be saying when your shiny Vista machine slows to a halt in six month's time because the search indexing grinds to a halt with more than 200 000 items (which isn't much when it's indexing ALL content - every email, image, doc etc).

Vista's search indexing is a disaster, an even bigger disaster than the registry...

They say Linux barely 1% of the desktop market. Well I bet that's because of people like me, who really want to use Linux, but it still missing some basic necessary features that won't let me do the job under Linux, so I have to stuck with Windows. Examples? In my case, "compact list view" feature from the file manager, or sharing photos, making phone calls, viewing webcam, with Yahoo messenger. Not to mention the colors or Gnome and Ubuntu simply sux, along with the extra panel bar on the top of the screen, placed there by default. and it still doesn't look like an OS where everything is an object. The interface it's still kind of weird.

Yes, you are completely correct in that I have never booted Vista. And, God willing, I never will.

I am sure that you get paid.
I hope you get much.
You want a new car ?

It would seem that the entire crux of your argument turns on the 'advanced' features that Vista can do (that Ubuntu apparently can't). And even then, the only evidence you offer to support your thesis is that you can't use the 'stack by' feature in Ubuntu, nor can you save a search as a dynamic search. That's a pretty weak argument, even more so when your article is titled so provocatively. My question is this: how does this feature help you work faster/better? What makes it so essential? To paraphrase 'The Princess Bride', I do not think that thing is as valuable as you think it is. When I use desktop search, I want to find one discrete file about 99% of the time. I find it, I work with it, I move on with my life. That's all I need. I'm not invalidating your experience, I'm sure there is a reason you need that feature, but neither would I recommend you write an article on it. Sounds like you're trolling for reasons to dog Ubuntu.

I wonder what you started to write that ended in such a zone. I may have no expertise in folder settings like you do Sir, but I'm sure I can do that little trick in Ubuntu too. Forget 7.10 or 7.04. I can manage that in ANY operating system. Its true when I look at Vista and say, "Is that it?" They took 6 years to build great folder options? HA HA. I have a HP Pavilion dv6502au Home Entertainment with a funny graphic card situation. Windows is crap on my machine. Ubuntu manages Good. Stop writing.

"With Vista, search isn't simply an afterthought. It permeates every nook and cranny of the Windows shell."

Pity, the same attitude wasn't take with regards to the security, which was very much an afterthought.

Just because Vista has excellent search capabilities doesn't make it a better OS than any; you just can't compare it with any other OS - be it GNU/Linux, UNIX, BSD, Mac OS. Forget about a distribution.

It may be true that Vista's search is better than on Gnome / KDE / Linux. But, talking about Search capabilities to prove superiority sounds very much like Microsoft themselves, when they try to list 100 reason why Vista will leave you speechless: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/100reasons
Up to reason # 22, I only found 3 features (rest are all repetitions) - a slight exaggeration but not very useful nonetheless.

And lastly, what system do you have? I have a computer (peacefully) running Windows XP and Linux Mint. Has 2.4 Ghz P4, 512 MB RAM. I can't run Vista on this because it can search better, worse still, I will definitely not upgrade the hardware to get better search facilities. The reason ought be more "real" & compelling - thanks!

Wow did this guy smoke up before he wrote this article?
Vista is better becuase he can perform better searchs? LOL

Wow wait until you start getting visues and your system losing even more system resources.

What makes vista better is the software. But then again the software comes with a price tag.

ubuntu is a great actaully all linux distros are great.

This is one of the stupidest articles I every read

In terms of the search engine, I would agree that the native search programs used by Ubuntu (Tracker) and Kubuntu (Strigi) are not as good. However, Google Desktop search program is available for Linux and works beautifully. Either that or Beagle is quite comprehensive (I don't know Beagle as well, since I use Google). While I don't know about the specific stacking feature, I would suggest that the Google search tool is as good as anything Windows Vista has available.

I have used Ubuntu for over a year. As a power user and a developer I have had not limitations or problems getting work done. If I got vista I would have to buy an expensive pc along with expensive vista to do what I am doing now. Why bother?
I do look forward to reading my google alerts for vista. It seems the vista nightmare just keeps getting worse. Like watching a car crash, I can't turn away.

Some serious feedback without foolish name-calling...

I'm a Windows user, but I've recently started trying out Linux. I've also been using Windows Vista for 1.5 yrs now in production business environments, (with earlier Vista betas in production). I've deployed Windows Vista on PIII 800MHz, 512MB RAM, with 30GB HDD; all the way up to Dual-Core/Core-Duo laptops and PC's with 1GB to 2.5GB of RAM. The business users running Vista on the old PIII 800MHz, 512MB RAM, 30GB HDD actually told me they felt that their PC ran better on Windows Vista than on Windows XP. My observations confirmed that and Vista was also easier to administer and manage. Be aware that when Vista is on a slow PC with a basic video card, many of the system intensive features are turned off or simplified for optimal performance on the given hardware. You generally have issues when you're on an in-between type of PC that is capable of running all the extras, but might not have much oomph left over if you run all the fancy things. Adding extra RAM does wonders though and the ability to use a USB thumb drive to provide extra RAM for swap disk stuff is very nice too. Even on the old 800MHz PC's the search features were all functional and the screen looked more crisp and clear than on XP too. Tablet PC features are super on Vista too! If you've never tried Tablet PC's, you really, honestly have no idea what you're missing! It honestly changes the ways you can interact with your computer and opens up so many more possibilities and things you can do.

I'm actually open to Linux though. I first tried Ubuntu 7.04. I put it on an HP P4 2.0GHz with 512 RAM and I think a 40GB HDD. First thing I found (I think) was that it wouldn't install on the NTFS formatted HDD. After using the Windows 98 disk to format as FAT32, Fiesty Fawn finally installed. Then it told me I had 121 updates that needed to be installed. No problem, let it do that. Then something happened and the laptop froze. Reboot the laptop and fire it up again. Retry the updates and it advised me I needed to manually install them. Ok, but it didn't tell me where to find the files to install nor how to do it. Though I searched all over, I couldn't find the updates nor how to manually install the updates that had thus far downloaded. Alright, time to wipe and load again. This time make sure the updates succeed, I guess. There were numerous times I thought for sure the update process had frozen the laptop again, and I had to fight off the urge to do a hard reboot, but eventually the updates succeeded. After running it with all the updates I found that the laptop would work for about 3 to 15 minutes and then force a reboot with some DOS like window mentioning something about the Tempurature being 41 degrees Celcius. (Is that hot for a computer?!?) That wasn't very usable.

So next I tried Fedora 7. That was much slower to boot up, but it was more stable. I liked Ubuntu's UI better though. Apps (including Firefox) would randomly shutdown quite frequently. It made it hard to have much confidence using it, but I persisted anyway. After a while I had enough with unexplainable application crashes and system reboots and gave up on Fedora for now.

Then I tried Vixta 0.95.2. I actually appreciated the familiarity that Vixta brought to Linux. I realize that it is just UI stuff, but it "felt" a little nicer and more visually appealing. I would highly recommend the Vixta UI if they see fit to bring out a production version of it. Unfortunately it did not appear that Vixta could be used for day-to-day work.

When Ubuntu 7.10 came out I promptly download and tried that too, installed it and ran the updates that were already out. This time the updates worked, but I'm still getting "supported" apps that crash for no apparent reason.

Basically my personal experiences have left me with the impression that the Linux distributions that I've tried are buggy, fragile, and unstable. Perhaps they just don't run well on HP laptops? I'd like to know if there is something I need to do differently. I'm willing to like Linux, and I'm not opposed to it. But I'm having trouble imagining using it on a daily basis with the lack of stability that I've experienced thus far.

From a graphical user interface perspective, the look and feel of Ubuntu and Fedora was reminiscent of Windows 98. Fonts were visibly poorer than on Windows XP and Windows Vista.

From a functionality perspective, I have used Tablet PC's for roughly 3 yrs now and I would sorely miss the Tablet PC features using Linux. I read that there are ways to get sylus recognized, but I didn't find much about applications like OneNote or Journal that really use digital inking well. The ability to take hand-written notes and search them as if they were typed text is huge. Tablet PC's are way too under-publicized. If Linux were to support Tablet PC functionality is a big way, I'm certain Linux fans would get excited about Tablet PC features. If you think Tablet PC stuff is nothing, then I'm certain you've never seriously tried it. It is such a more natural way to interact with a computer and you can do so many more new things with the Tablet PC. I'd love to see Linux embrace Tablet PC functionality.

But overall the lack of stability in Linux is a major show-stopper for me. I'm still open to it though and I'll keep dabbling with it. But I really need stability and I'd be much more tollerable if it had serious inking support.

Just some honest observations and thoughts about Linux.

You are judging an entire OPERATING SYSTEM because of an Application that you are having trouble getting to work? Amazing!

That is like someone saying they hate windows because they cannot get Notepad to work right. Look, if an application does not work --- uhm, you can:

A) Learn to use the application.
B) Reinstall the application.
C) Use a different application.

To say that an application not working EXACTLY the way you want means the whole operating system is inferior is absurd.

That said, works great for me! I would not touch $500 vista with a ten foot pole when I have everything I need *AND* I can run windows programs with Wine for free!

How can u compare a free OS with an Expensive OS? Morron...

Free Linux can help many people...
1.5 US$ Linux will kill Microsoft...

I'm using MacOS, but Linux is good enough...

Compare Vista with Leopard! Not with Linux! Morron (again)!

I'm running Vista Home Premium (preinstalled) on a Toshiba Satellite A 100-011, and Kubuntu 7.04 on an old Compaq Presario B1013. I was never able to make the search function in Vista work, whereas in Ubuntu it worked perfectly from the first minute. If just the comparison of search functions determined you to say that such or such distribution "sucked", I concluded by myself from my own experience which one really did...

Randall,
I need your opinion on something..Should I use the $2000 I saved by NOT buying a new computer on a Disney Cruise for me and my family (4 people $1600) or should I just stick it in my 401K where it will be worth an extra 20K by the time I retire?

Wait a minute, how would you know? You're the idiot who upgraded your computer just for the "search" function!
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

My neighbour asked me to help him install Norton 360 for Vista onto his fresh out fo the box new Toshiba PC, after 2 hours (using my 7 year old Toshiba Portege with Zenwalk Linux to look for help on the web) and multiple freezes we gave up.

Anyway, Ubuntu has worked perfectly for me since 4.10. We are talking flawlessly.

However, that is just my experience, I am not enough of a dickhead to draw too many conclusions. And certainly I wouldn't want to say anything bad about Vista in general because I don't know enough about it.

I am disappointed by the name-calling, vulgarity and swearwords used in the various responses by Ubuntu supporters. While I never plan to to use Vista unless I'm forced to by my employer, I am not gaining much useful information from posts that exhibit a teenager's level of maturity. I am not saying all the posts are of an unpleasant manner, just too many. Please, a little professionalism and graciousness will go a long way!

Dan Aquinas,

I find the title of this piece deeply offensive, dismissing the tremendous achievement that is Ubuntu 7.10. Remember, this is an operating system that was delivered on time (again), is free (and always will be) and has served me well for many years.

If you are thinking of buying a new computer to get Vista, I think that most of the Linux heads would simply suggest that you download one CD from the Ubuntu website and see if you can get a few more years out of your hardware. If you don't like it then go ahead with your original plan but donate your hardware to a charity or something - it'll run for a while yet with something like Ubuntu on it.

Afraid a few responses got dragged down to Randall's level.

This really is the most pathetic piece that I have read in many moons.

This is the absolute worst review I have ever seen. Truly thoughtless. What is sad about it is that the reviewer is someone who probably loves to use linux aka Ubuntu and just does not like the fact that he is not the only one reaping its benefits. he doesn't want it to become mainstream. So he blasts it off with a not too thought out argument. Even he himself, cannot find anything bad to fault the distro on except on an applet or feature that 99% of people could care less about..

I was trying to see something objective.
Also for those that use vulgarity, you should not. Then again, the type of people that use an OS is not what is judged here. I think some folks like me were looking forward to hearing something we could report back to get fixed in Ubuntu or other linux distros. We got nothing.

I never understood why people put so much emphasis on desktop searching. Maybe i'm the only one, but I always arrange my files into a logical directory structure so i just know where my stuff is.. How hard is that? All my music in in a folder marked "Music" with subfolders for each artist, and each artist folder with subfolders for albums.. Documents are done the same way... Just put stuff where it makes sense and this whole "searching" argument becomes a moot point...

Vista desktop sophistication? You mean a pile of DRM infested bloatware? With confusing desktop features most people would never need or want? No thanks I'm sticking to Ubuntu 7.10 as my only desktop for business and pleasure. No worries here, I'm Microsoft free for 2 years and telling everybody.

myk, I couldn't agree more!

As for the title of this abysmal article, two words: High Class.

Next time try harder to write an article that "provides in-depth technical analysis on key products, solutions, and technologies for sound buying decisions and business gain." (Taken from InfoWorld - About Us.)

Whoever wrote this, doesn't have a clue about a OS. Why in the world is search so important to you, do you forget where you save data? Let's see Randall, you should learn to write better articles or just stop writing all together. Ubuntu is way better then Vista, I'm using both, and so far Ubuntu, runs faster, as well as I don't get any error or system reboots. With Vista whenever I want to change a setting I have a Pop ups. With Ubuntu nothing comes up, plus it's free. As well as way better then Vista when it comes to the look and free. Vista looks to be a copy of something I see on a mac. Which doesn't shock me, hell didn't Bill steal his ideas from Apple ? Anyways you really should learn how to write a story that compares both on something more important then the search button. Please do me a favor and shot yourself as well as give whatever money you where paid back, for writing such a crappy story. Thanks and have a nice day.

"Sucks" - your mama and editor should wash you mouth out with soap, cripes what an assinine tile for the article. Oh wait it's supposed to be that way so you can get all the little Ubuntu'ians to flame you in the comments section - how immature, sorta like shooting fish in a barrel.

But while you have a overly joyous crush on the Vista desktop search you don't speak well (or at all) of Vista in general, wonder why.

And in part 2 "eye candy at it's worst" you'll explain how Vista Areo is so cool and functional and worth the cost of a seperate graphics card with 256mb onboard memory.

Get a grep! Hahahahaha!

100% agree. If all you linux fanboys think that windows will ever replace linux are mistaken. I love ubuntu and it has its purpose in the computer world but it isn't for the average home user. The linux community is so fractured and there are so many useless distros out there, that unless everyone pools their brain power to one or three distros linux will always be the hobbie OS...

Folks,
I am one of those people who were foolish enough to sink down to Randall's level. For that I apologize. I will say that to dismiss an entire operating system based upon a small feature here and there is ridiculous. I use Win XP at work and all I can say is that it's search function is awful. Did I beg my boss to spend thousands of dollars to upgrade all of the computers in the department just for the sake of being able to find an email written 4 years ago? Nope. I downloaded Copernic. Its fast and its free. There you go Randall, I could have solved your search problem and saved you a fortune!
At home I use Ubuntu! Its fast, efficient, gentle on my systems resources, and its FREE!
I use OpenOffice for work, Firefox for browsing, and Thunderbird as my email client. That alone covers 90% of my computer usage. OH! Before I forget. I've got another pc in the living room with MythTv. Vista and Media Center are not needed in my home!
Good luck with your computing Randall.. I hope you'll be as enthusiastic about Vista in a year when your spending an entire day re-installing the os to clear up and speed up your system and another 2 hours downloading and installing the first major service pack! I'll be home enjoying my computer!
VC

Are you new? No of course Ubuntu is not like Vista, which I greatly appreciate. It's people like you that let microsoft continue to be such a lead in the industry, its not because its better, its because you just don't know anything else. I bought a new laptop with vista, I figured i'd test it out. 2gb of ram... and vista alone is using 49%? WTF is this. I personally like to have full use of my hardware. Ubuntu used as little as 15%

One supporter of Vista. The only reason Vista is selling at all is because most computer vendors are *forced* to put it on their new computers.. My best friend bought a brand new vista box on a fast dual processor machine.. It's embarassing how slow vista is on it.. Maybe in 5 years computers will be fast enough to make vista fly, but right now it's dog slow. It doesn't suspend and awaken.. It crashes even after a complete re-install from the rescue disk.. finally had to bring the machine back and *get a brand new machine* it's still dog slow and crashes...

Since most of what he does it light book keeping and graphic editing, I loaded Ubuntu 7.04 (and just upgraded to 7.10) dual boot with vista and now the *only* reason he ever uses vista is look at powerpoint slides (probably the sole remaining piece of software microsoft makes that is ahead of everyone else)...

My own personal machine I thought about upgrading several times (mostly due to all the hype) a year ago, but the vista upgrade utilities says I have several pieces of hardware the vista doesn't support. Funny, Ubuntu and XP work like a charm...

Personally, I'd buy a oem or used copy of XP if I really needed windows... Otherwise, I'll suffer a little bit of cheap fonts for a machine that I can have 4 things running on for days at a time (yes I leave my machine running at night crunching graphics), without a problem. I can't remember the last time linux crashed on me..

At $200 - $500, Vista is the biggest waste of money... Half of the cost of a computer goes just to the OS ? No thanks...

Ubuntu will look prettier long before Vista runs fast and stabel.....

As someone whose used both the older ubuntu and vista, i must say. Vista sucks ballz. If it didn't run games i like so very,very much, i would never use it. The search engine provided in it doesn't even work(i tried to find a music file that was in my documents and it couldn't find it... come on. How can it not find that?) like you say. now i haven't tried the new ubuntu, as i don't have a CD-R on me right now, but vista isn't as good as you say. Hell it's pretty bad if you ask me.

I have to laugh at the cant teach an old dog new tricks: Ive been doing that for the past 18 months.

I'm the family's computer 'guy' which used to take a lot of my time. Then about a year and a half ago I counted up the time I was wasting clearing out the crapware on their PC's even though I had managed to ween everyone off IE and Outlook. A few of them (parents, father in law, brother and two brother in laws) were all looking into buying for the first time a computer or upgrading and told them my tech support would only do Linux machines.
So far I have installed Linux on 23 machines.
You see one of my wife's aunt (Mandriva 2007 with Metisse) who lives in a retirement home asked me to install on their computers 'the same things I had on mine' which I did and I still spend less time now troubleshooting even with all the these people.
2/3 of the people I have installed Linux are retired folks. 5 never used a computer. I did also quite a few dual boots as well as used Parrallels to run Win/Linux for people who need Windows for 'that' one piece of software. And games. That was the big one. Dual boots are a great solution for the gaming dilemna.
I use Ubuntu (Kubuntu is much more popular than the GNOME interface) and PCLinux and even SuSe which I eventually stopped and replaced with PCLinuxOS which has become my favorite newbie friendly distro. I used an X environment twice on old machines as well as two Damn Small and one Puppy install.

My mom NEVER used a computer and in 3 months is using Firefox easily, getting her email through Gmail (love the firefox extension for that), watches her DVD's, listens to online radio big band music, chats with her friends online as well as talk to her sisters in europe on Skype.
She can access through Samba my 750Gig HD which is attached to my wireless router since she lives downstairs from us and she casually talks about taking things out of my son's computer just like a pro. Like I said, she never used a computer before.

My dad has been using a computer since 1999 and often used my laptop (Debian) and asked me about 2 years ago to switch him to Linux. He had read about Shuttleworth in a few europeans magazines and was familiar of open source (I work on two projects so he is aware of GPL) and Linux.
The switch was pretty easy since he was familiar with Firefox, Thunderbird, VLC, Skype, OpenOffice and a few other staples he was using in Windows.
He burns his own cds and downloads his own pictures from his camera. After viewing many Live Cds I had given him, he even remarked that they all looked the same and that he couldnt tell them apart when they used the same graphical desktop environment :-) The other thing he asked me was why we didnt do this earlier. I actually didnt think it was time yet.
But now,...I have pretty good first hand knowledge of how easy a Linux distro is for newbies now. If anything I think it is easier on a total newb because they dont have any preconceived notion of 'how its supposed to work', which I believe happens with Mac OS as well.
My father still keeps an XP partition because of 'that one' software he needs for accounting purposes.
Yes my nieces still prefer their pirated Photoshop
to Gimp and know how to use vm wares but then again they knew how to use mount cds when they were 9.
This is not a perfect solution but I dont think anyone would ever claim such a thing, Id say for the stuff that takes 90-95% of the average user's time, it is very good.

So yes, the 'old dog wont learn new tricks' makes me laugh. I know lots of old dogs and theyre not as stupid as you may think and honestly it isnt rocket science to learn to click a button to get a browser or software going.

-

Personally, I triple boot on my MacBook Pro and use the Linux side about 75% of the time, the rest on OSX since I collaborate on video projects and Final Cut is omnipresent. So I can say that I have good experience in all three OS although I dont know enough or care to know Mac software ins and outs to do any kind of help. I do my stuff and get out. Our big home computer is a dual boot (games baby!) and another laptop is strictly Linux. Kubuntu, PCLinuxOS and Debian are the three I use.
My old P4 tower is where I test various distros when I have time so it always varies.

I don't know why you all are shocked at this article. I have slowly learned that MS fans are amazed at the simplest of redone crap. They don't even attempt to learn anything outside of MS and MS plays on that.

I also don't believe the individuals that claim they have gone through multiple distros and found them unstable. I can understand Fedora do to its test bed nature. But Ubuntu has worked as advertised everytime I have had to put it on a machine with the exception of a sound card problem here and there. And that is no worse than the problems I have experienced with windows like my laptop that won't recognize the DVD burner.

And this compiz-fusion will most likely be a pack of lies as I have compared the two and Aero simply doesn't measure up. And please don't talk about Vista turning off the eye-candy for lower end machines because compiz-fusion will probably still run on some of those machines.

Why do people always compare OS's? OSx vs XP, Vista vs Leopard, Windows vs Ubuntu etc...

Ubuntu is an alternative choice period As Mac is to Windows. Is Mac better than Windows? Thats totally up to the user and what he/she does on it.

Assessing a desktop experience with search so called. The locate command on Linux does all the search I will ever need and much faster than anything Windows can conjure.

How do these clowns qualify to be experts and "respected" commentators
I use Windows for work because I am forced to by my employer. I use Linux for everything else because I want to and love to. I wonder if any of these clowns that write these articles have actually booted into and used a Linux machine for only a few days.

I will actually begin to listen to these guys the day I can use my Windows machine for 3 days without needing a reboot.

Vista sucks, so I don't use it.
Compiz is for people who wish they had Vista, so I don't use it.
I don't require massive searching, so beagle got the axe.
You won't find IM clients on my boxes, so no purple/scim/gaim/whatever.
I use Thunderbird, so I dispensed with the Evo-bloat.
If I ever see another splash screen, I'll go over to the Windows side permanently, so no splashes or artwork or KDE.

Yessir, it's minimal Xubuntu, somewhat upgraded to Gutsy, without the nonsense.

If the troll of an article were true, perhaps the author needs to spend some quality time with Vista. In fact, when the MS execs are found guilty of crimes against humanity, they should be sentenced to use their own OS for life. (talk about cruel)

Vista - it's Windows ME, but prettier!

i also think that the desktop search is way too much given point of. I would give vista a try if it were free as in free beer.

most people i know wouldnt give 2 shits about a search function. if you are going to use windows just because of a stupid search function, go right ahead, idiot. do us a favor and dont write any more articles.

Hmm... so you spend so much money for Vista's search 'feature'...? Well, at least that's better reason than 'Eye Candy' thing. I bought my DELL XPS M1330 with Vista Home Premium and since I work on .NET Framekwork 3.5 (beta still) at work and WPF (and all the craps along with it), have to retain Vista for my business laptop, but still loved to run Linux on it and installed Ubuntu 7.10. I gotta tell ya, I spend more time on Linux than Vista (just my work).

But anyway, I have 1 more PC and my old laptop, all of them runs complete linux, no dual-booting. PC runs openSUSE 10.3 and my old laptop runs Ferora. I don't go for eye candy stuffs (even beryl - though it is way superior to Vista's eye candy) and that's the first thing I switch off once installed (why do I install if I have to turn it off? to show off to Windows-only guys like you coz you buy a new PC for Search and Aero - not security, freedom, tweaking - and the rest).

So, now if I have to strip off Aero and all the rest; what have I got finally? Windows worst than Windows XP in GUI, with annoying popup commin up (UAC) at least 1-5 times (depending on what you are installing) for confirmation (which they call security - how innovative). I spend $2,000 (and more) bucks to get an operating system slower than, uglier than Windows XP? How much that sux?

Grow up dude... Money is valuable, don't throw away just like that... probably you are living on your parents' money that's why you buy a new PC just for search feature and re-arranging folders.

Honestly, like the previous comment, I don't understand the much-hyped search functionality.

Arange files and folders proper, you won't need em.

Adios.

Uh oh! Looks like your article has put all the basement dwelling nerds into a tizzy! I for one totally agree with you though! Ubuntu still isn't ready for the masses.

What the hell was that? I was expecting a review of Ubuntu and I got a description of Vista's search function. I'm old school debian, and consequently no great fan of Ubuntu, but you could have written that without even looking at Ubuntu.

No matter how stupid this post is, he succeeded. InfoWorld needs customers, it needs hits to fulfill their advertising, and guess what, they keep doing it with their Ubuntu FUD posts. I say ignore these idiots and stop coming here and reading their garbage. As it stands, it is all of us Linux people responding. Lets see how this site does w/o Linux people responding to their FUD. It would probably allow InfoWorld to save money because they would be able to host on dial-up.

Lots said already, but I think the whole point is this:

If you think Ubuntu is crap or even just dont like the way they do search or need a "stack by" feature - here it is - TELL THEM, if you do it nicely and it is something others will also find useful they will listen and implement it.

Now in contrast - try telling MS to change something - they live in a pure capitalistic market, where, if you dont like the product you tell them by not buying it. This as most people who have tried buying a MS-less PC knows is not as easy as it should be.

So after all this babble - Ubuntu has the potential to get the "stacked-by" feature, if people demand it. With Vista you get what you get, the good and the bad.

I downloaded Ubuntu and burnt it to CD, but I was extremely disappointed. It didn't have the same WoW factor, the same SHOCK and AWE, the same colours of the Vista CD. And it had no box to put the CD in. And I couldn't find a serial number anywhere for the Ubuntu CD. Was I ripped off or what?

I'm sorry, but it needs to be said: the author of this article sucks, at least when compared with a journalist who has the slightest clue about anything. Gee that was easy, call me a journalist.

Seriously, there should be a ban on people reviewing linux distributions. You could balance your criticism by discussing the freedom the system offers, the lack of drm, the cost, the great leaps that have been made in such a short period of time, the security benefits, the great community, etc. etc. etc. but you choose to write an article about a lack of "pervasive" "integrated" search. Yeah really focusing on the big issues there einstein.

Is the lack of a decent search ability a big enough deal to discredit an entire operating system. I personally have no use for search functions. I used Vista for about 2 months and never touched any of the search boxes. I am tired of hearing about god damn search features. That is not innovative, its just annoy seeing every other headline about OS functions having something to do with a damn search box.

I received my copy of Vista Ultimate through MSDN. As a developer, I try to keep up with all of the latest products. With a 2.8GHz Athlonx64, 2GB of DDR2, and an 80GB HD, my target machine came in well over the specs for Vista. I did a fresh install, no bloatware, nothing, just the tools (Visual Studio, Office, etc.) that I use. After a month of extreme frustration, literally fighting with O/S to get anything done, having to wait and wait and wait for Vista to do anything, having drivers not working, or working one minute and not the next, trying to do things which worked on all previous versions of Windows only to find they no longer worked or behaved differently in Vista, and so many more headaches, I reloaded Windows XPx64 (that's right, XPx64) onto the machine. Everything works perfectly again! Now, I'm able to get my work done, quickly, without fighting the O/S.

Vista is to XP what ME was to 98SE. Vista's search capability does not make up for that deficiency.

And because you are comparing Vista to Ubuntu, I'll just add that on the same machine, I dual-boot (different drive) to Xubuntu-amd-x64. Like XPx64, it has always "just worked". Like XPx64, I don't need to fight the O/S to get anything done. I think having an O/S that helps me do my work instead of hindering it is better than any "neat" search ability. I'm sure others would agree.

I usually don't read InfoWorld but your articles came up in my Google News and from just the titles I had to read the series. I moved from Windows XP to Ubuntu Linux back in November because I got sick of the frequent security updates and how poorly my (admittedly) older computer ran. I tried Freespire and wasn't happy so I tried Ubuntu. Before I fired up the Freespire CD I had never used Linux, but as a rather moderate power user I don't fear tweaking things by hand or using the command line. Within a couple of weeks Ubuntu had won me over for it's ease of use and faster response on my computer (2.2 GHz Celeron with less than a gig of RAM). I started using Gutsy when it hit beta, and while it hasn't all been smooth sailing I'm glad I made the upgrade.

You're right, I haven't used Vista, but that's because I knew I could never run it on this computer. As a disabled person the cost of upgrading is prohibitive, but as someone who was already unhappy with XP I wasn't interested in even trying Vista. Security is supposed to be better, but I've already seen updates needed on their "newest and best" OS, so I have to question if it's really that much better.

You say that searching sucks with Ubuntu Gutsy, and i have to admit that I'm not happy with it either. Tracker runs so much that I get a performance hit, plus it takes up a lot of hard drive space indexing all of my emails, RSS feeds, documents and media files. But I found something that works fine for me: Google Desktop Search for Linux. It indexes all of my documents on five partitions (including my XP partition I keep around for updating my PDA and a FAT partition with shared data for both OSes), but I never get a performance hit when it's running. And if I really want to disable it I can do it with two mouse clicks.

How usable is it? I just hit the Ctrl key twice and a search box pops up. As I type it starts giving me results, and if I want to I can open the results in my browser (I'm currently testing Firefox 3) where I can open the files, or even just the folders. If I'm looking for an audio file and I don't want to open Amarok (or it's a Windows Media file that I can't converted to Ogg Vorbis yet) I can open the folder and either open the file in Movie Player or if it's an Ogg file I can simply place my cursor on the file and it starts playing. Can you do that in Vista?

I hate the commenters that insist on trash talking (which doesn't do anyone any favors), but the first three articles in the series reek of shilling for Microsoft. I'm not even sure you used Ubuntu for more than a weekend, which is hardly any basis for saying it sucks. My first week in Ubuntu came after using Windows since version 3.1 so I had to learn how to do things in my new OS. I found many things that I thought were better handled by Windows XP, but as I used Ubuntu more I learned how to do things not only as well as in XP but better. I'm now to the point where I'm about to try syncing my PDA in Ubuntu and if it works I'm getting rid of Windows completely. The only Windows programs I still use are Dreamweaver and Fireworks, which run just fine under Wine, thank you, and a CD cataloging program that needs more work to work under Wine, and I'm going to look again for native Linux alternatives.

I'll read the coming articles in this series, but please do both yourself and your readers a favor and put a little more research into your writing. Spend some more time with Ubuntu before you slam it as worthless. Anything less just makes you look like you're on Microsoft's payroll and your series is designed to do little more than to try to eliminate the threat that Ubuntu is becoming to the Microsoft hegemony. It also makes InfoWorld look so biased against anything not from Redmond that anyone looking for unbiased reporting will look elsewhere, and your advertisers will start thinking of spending their ad dollars elsewhere.

Actually ubuntu has an awesome search and filtering ability with locate | grep combination. As I am almost always at the command line anyway, I don't even need to read for the mouse.

Try it. You'll like it

If anything sucks it is Vista!!!!

There 3d is a POS compared to Beryl. Beryl can do more on less hardware and look better than vista on twice the hardware.

I have given 2 people Ubuntu since they keep blowing up there XP boxes and they have nothing but good things to say about it.

Please stop writing B.S. Ubuntu is a good product.

I tire of the Vista discussion. "It is as boring as life itself" (Sprocketts?). It's all been said; no arguing can really resurrect it. The real question is which Linux. And though Ubuntu and Kubuntu are quite nice and are providing a critical boost in Linux penetration, it does indeed have some stability issues. The Linux distribution I use and highly recommend to all quite receptive clients is MEPIS Linux. Stability is truly excellent. And licensed file types like MP3 and MPG are enabled upon installation without requiring further subsequent installations. Internet access and email were, of course, immediately available. Even my and my clients HP printers installed without the bloat of the HP install disk. In fact, each network print server was up and running as easily as the local printers and again without LinkSys or HP CDs.
Give MEPIS a try. We believe it is by far the best Linux out there. And, like many other Linux versions, it comes on a live-CD that can be used to try it out without installing on your hard drive.
So lighten-up on the Windows and Vista vitriol. Let those who don't know any better, do what they will do. I listen to Pink Floyd and Procol Harum. I know many more people listen to Brittney Spears and Jennifer Lopez. That's just how it is.

Really... Silly article. Got so many stirred up. I have Vista on my laptop.
I have Suse Linux 10.1 on my server.
I run vmware with XP on that server.

Reasons for having XP,

hmmmm, p

1. Print drivers my new Canon printer (at the time) had no Linux support. boo hoo Canon.
Just as a matter of fact there aren't many companies that provide support for Lin out of the box... very rare!

2. My old software wont work in Vista land... not properly anyway!

Ubuntu ... Dont understand it. I've played in it and it doesn't do anything better than SUSE. It's just a preferance I guess.

I can skin the Gnome environment to my liking

God forbid someone should say something nasty about a 'free' distro, what's the world coming to.

Linux is not for the idiot users out there, you want to support them, I know I don't. It's hard enough with Windoz XP's

But for Linux to take over you need to have a serious look at the business users and what they have been using for the last 10 years.

Then ask is there a way to provide that product under linux.

MS Orifice -> OO not much of a comparison... OO still a way to go... flaky and crashes under any great load. Not to say that this is because of the OS (it could be ... I don't know... no linux user knows)

Plenty of products out there GIMP is great but is finicky and will crash. Under Windows it works better. This isn't a SUSE think either I've used it in Ubuntu and it performs the same way.

So what is linux good for?

Well ... still a great server product (kicks a$$$e), which ever flavour you like. Got me over the XP 10 users sharing issue without costing me/client the earth to have a couple more users get at their data.

Linux Desktop ... Gnome needs more work, Beryl is a nice start. KDE is the same it needs better functionality.

Layout of menu's is rubbish although FC5 has a pretty clean one which is nice and easy to remember.

Oooh Vista, client had installed 9 PC's paid the fees, paid me to do it...

Will not run Autocad(unsupported), no support for Quicken(accounts), Access 97 wont work unless you get a special service pack from MS which is beta and unsupported. If you have more than 1G of ram you need to install the Jet 3.5 engine otherwise you cant install it.
When you get it to run it locks out any other users from the database unless you apply said service patch.

Now this isn't a Vista issue, I hear you geer - yeah sure! It's the people who knew that the product was coming and did nothing about it.

Shame on Autocad, Shame on Intuit. Shame on me for not testing my own product (although I'm in the middle of rewritting the app so it's not that bad... it's just taken a long time and I work on my own- that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it).

But the worse thing is, we have to roll back his shinny new machines to XP to make his business functional again!

Now tell me Linux can do this .... all you Linheads ... tell me that I can install these apps, and have them work ???!! No I didn't think so and before you decide that world domination of Linux is near think again... The world is run by business... business will not move an inch if there is no reason to move and you need to consider what software needs to be replaced.

Can it be done? I doubt it. I wish. I like the competition. But domination is a dream. Watch out linheads... Apple will clean you up for a functional desktop.

I guess lingeeks will be lingeeks and wingeeks will never see eye to eye. But what you argue over is an OS...

In the end who cares as long as you can do what you need to get done!

I haven't tried Linux yet, but after trying to transition from XP to Vista, I am ready to.
I learned in a DOS environment, so probably should be able to handle the basics of most Linux if the OS supports the right hardware and software. Here's my analysis of XP vs. Vista vs. what I've heard about Linux.

XP: It has worked well for me so far, don't want to let it go, but fear that Microsoft will strongarm its users using the "activation" and "genuine" features into upgrading when the product reaches its "end of life-cycle". I still have an old computer that no longer connects to the internet running Windows 98 just fine, that OS was actually installed after MS had already decided to stop supporting it. It runs my applications and hardware that wouldn't run on ME or XP. Since 98 never had any activation features, I didn't have to connect that old computer to the internet just to use the old operating system. The same will no longer be true of any product that requires activation.

Windows Vista: Got the home premium flavor installed on the notebook I acquired earlier this year when my old notebook developed hardware issues. Pros: Aero interface looks pretty, and the Vista operating system supports the very newest hardware and software (like Direct X 10 games). Indexing search feature mentioned in this article can SOMETIMES be useful. User Access Control improves security by warning me in the extremely rare (never, so far) case that a program tries to run on my computer that I did not command to run. Cons: Aero interface is disabled by the presence of incompatible programs (reverts to "Vista basic" color scheme). DRM features suck. They make Windows media player .wma files incompatible with Itunes and Ipods. Indexing your entire hard drive (especially if you have more than 50 folders under program files) slows any searching in Vista to a crawl, so it is only useful to index a few folders off your hard drive (the Documents folder, for instance). Vista also makes it difficult to look at and find files in your Internet Explorer temporary files folder. Did I mention DRM features suck? Vista's User Access Control makes many XP programs incompatible with Vista. UAC also sucks, because there is no option not to prompt again for a given program. UAC also prompts you for every file operation (moving files, installing programs) unless you turn it off. This is great if you are a business intent on controlling your employees actions, or a parent intent on controlling your children's actions. But it sucks for anyone else, especially since there is no easy way for a standard home user to fine tune it like you would a firewall program.

Linux: May or may not have drivers available for various hardware. Some software, and most games, especially 3D games, are only available for the PC (sound familiar, MAC users?) Open source software is constantly being updated and distributed by the community.
There are several distributions of Linux out there, and I must admit I'm a bit baffled as to which one to try. On the plus side, being open source, Linux itself is free, free is good. But the medium on which it is distributed is not necessarily free - even for DSL (d**n small Linux) a CD with Linux on it mailed to me, or a USB drive with Linux preloaded does cost $. Sometimes I even see retail packages of Linux available for purchase at computer/electronics superstores. For purely surfing web pages, Linux would probably work, if I have drivers for my wireless home network available. My printer is old enough that there are probably Linux drivers for it out somewhere, as is my internal zip drive in the computer I would be putting it on. Also, hopefully there are adequate graphics, word processing, spreadsheet, cd burning, and music applications for Linux somewhere out there. But sadly, since I am not already knowledgeable about Linux forums, it will probably take about as much time to find all the drivers and apps I want for the Linux desktop system I hope to build as it will to install the upcoming service pack for Vista.

MS has always been software for idiots - Vista has even managed to upset a few idiots as well - doesn't bode well if they start to lose their niche market

If you want a version of Ubuntu that looks & feels like more like your familiar Windoze XP then try the free upgrade to Kubuntu. Kubuntu uses the KDE desktop. IMHO KDE is loads nicer and much more feature-rich than either Windoze or the Gnome desktop.

As well as being highly customisable, KDE makes extensive use of context menu functions. It also has loads of sweet extras like KATE (KDE Advanced Text Editor). Compare that with Windoze crappy notepad if you do any coding.

Then there is Krusader advanced file manager that lets you do sophisticated directory comparisons locally, across a Windoze network or to an FTP or SFTP connection on a remote server. 'Doze has nothing to touch it.

And SMB4K manages connections to Windoze boxes better and faster than Windoze can itself. they say little thibgs please little minds but I love the little weather applet on the panel (taskbar) that patches into any of the planet's 3000 or so METAR stations via the internet to tell you latest weather. In fact, KDE has more goodies that you can shake a stick at. And they are all genuinely FREE. No adware, spyware trojan or worms!

Seriously, Linux has come a long way the last 18 months. If you haven't tried it lately, then perhaps you should? And remember, only Micro$haft makes Windoze but anyone can make Linux. This means that in addition to the Ubuntu family of Linuxes, there is a tremendous diversity of Linuxes out there. So and there is almost certainly one to suit you and your hardware

Enjoy! G.

I think "nixternal" has it exactly right. This is the tech press equivalent of a Katie Couric fluff piece on the evening news. It's a whole lot more about entertainment and driving web traffic via controversy - than any real attempt at tech journalism.

Ubuntu is a nice distro. But in regards to hardware support and real life application distros such as Fedora and OpenSuSE are way ahead. Try to install Ubuntu on an nVidia SATA RAID with dual-boot XP. No chance. Ubuntu will maliciously destroy the RAID array pointing out that it isn't a real hardware RAID controller and therefore should be ignored. The Linux folk scream "use software RAID", but that excludes using dual-boot and in the end the CPU does the work for the RAID, which is the same as using it the way nVidia intended it.
I gave up on Ubuntu and went with OpenSuSE. I tried Fedora and do like it a bit better, but their repository servers are so painfully slow that installing anything takes hours.
So why not use Windows? Well, I do have 64 bit XP, which isn't any better than Linux as hardware and software vendors ignore the existence of 64 bit OS and one cannot find even the most basic drivers.
I'd go with Vista if it wasn't so hopelessly overpriced, technologically outdated, and didn't have a GUI that induces projectile vomiting.
It is a really remarkable time in PC history. There is not a single OS available that has a satisfying balance between price, features, hardware support, and software choices. The conclusion would be to go with a Mac. Well, the features are there, hardware support is not a problem, software is there as well, but the pricing is just insane.
Maybe I dig my old Commodore 64 out. That thing really gave some bang for the buck. Developers really put thought into every detail, made the system do things it wasn't ever intended for, and the C64 has the greenest CPU ever. Processing capacity versus power consumption is way above anything that is in production today. The C64 was a pig, 20 years later we just got lipstick. Where is the real innovation, especially in the OS market? This development is no surprise as 20 years ago an uncontrolled monopoly shaped up that is now on 80% of all desktops. Monopolies have no incentive for innovation. I propose splitting up Microsoft, level the playing field, and start from scratch.

Im still on the fence about Ubuntu. I use it from time to time to try and learn more about Linux. I currently have it installed on my Windows XP Laptop, running it through VMware Workstation. I do like it, I like the software that comes with it as opposed to having to buy and install it seperately, but its just not quite as user friendly as XP (I dont believe like some Linux users that user friendlyness is a bad thing). However the main bar to me switching completely to Ubuntu (or any Linux flavour) is the lack of games support. A computer has to have good all round utility and currently Linux is lacking in this area.
I think the basis of the above argument that Vist is better than Linux because of the Indexing and search function is a pretty poor one. the author didnt point out the abnormal amount of system resources hogged by Vista while its indexing, also Microsofts total lack of faith in its own product that they set it to create restore points obsessively and the final nail in the Vista coffin for me was having to answer yes to all those annoying popups generated by that DRM (i think) thing whenever i wanted to do practically anything with my system.
For me, Vista is an extremely poor Operating System, but then so was XP when it was released, so I might try it again after the first service pack is released. Its a pity though that it will take a Service pack release to start to put right what is an extremely shoddy product.
Ubuntu will remain something that I will continue to toy around with but I cant currently see it replacing XP on my system anytime soon.

Interesting points there Jimmy. I think part of the problem with a total switch is that one is so familiar with Windows that the thought of totally relying on another OS can seem quite daunting. So people use the "safe" dual boot option. Trouble is dual booting is a bit like only being able to ride a bike with stabilisers on. You never really find out what the machine can do. Not that stability is an issue with Linux of course :-)

Anyway, here's our story for what it's worth...

We bought a couple of IBM Lenovo 3000C200 laptop PCs in 2007 May. These are fairly average 1700MHz laptops purchased from a UK supplier called eBuyer for around 300 quid a throw. These came preloaded with the basic version of Windows Vista.

To describe Vista's performance as dismal would be understatement of the year. Problems included...

1. Waiting over an hour to get the OS from pre installed state to being actually usable (and I use the word "usable" lightly).
2. MS outlook 2002 crashed on start - seems the pre-installed Office 2007 conflicted with it.
3. Painfully slow start up, over five minutes
4. Painfully slow to do anything at all.
5. Stupid user interface with lots of unnecessary clutter that needed switching off in order to get any speed from the machine.

So I took the "brave" step of reformatting the drive on one machine and installing Ubuntu Linux instead. No dual-boot, just pure Linux! Now, I have flirted with Linux on desktop PC's for some time, though not in any serious way. Until recently Linux was not user-friendly enough for desktop use and besides, it lacked decent applications. However I have used Linux much more successfully on web servers for many years. Both my main sites run Debian Linux c/w Apache webserver.

But things change very quickly in the IT Industry and Linux in particular has come a very long way. Besides Vista made me so angry that I thought it was time to try one of the "new" Linuxes as a Windows replacement on a real, working desktop. So I undertook quite a lot of research to try to establish which Linux best suited to day-to-day, desktop use in a harsh business environment. There are many choices but in the end I opted for a Ubuntu mainly becasue it was a Debian-based distribution and seemed pretty easy to set up. This is what I discovered...

1. It took less than 15 minutes to install a working Ubuntu, c/w a fully working OpenOffice.
2. I then decided to Outlook with the far superior (and free) Mozilla Thunderbird. This has never crashed and handles my huge archive of old emails far better than MS Outlook. FYI MS Outlook goes decidedly wibbly as its *.PST file approaches 2GB.
3. Ubuntu's start up averages less than 1/3 of the time that Vista takes.
4. Applications load at a speed that I have never experienced with any Windows machine.
5. I have no problems with virus, spyware, trojans, adware etc. Remember that on many Windows PC's half your system reources can be taken up running anti-virus, anti-spyware, firewall and other "protective" software.
6. Ubuntu, and almost all the software for iUbuntu is FREE! No strings, no spies, no adware. In fact there are none of the "nasties" that one has come to expect with Windows.

Nearly six months and countless installed applications later, these Ubuntu-based machines still deliver the same performance that they did when they were new. Compare that with any version of Windoze, where machines get slower and slower the more applications you install.

I subsequently upgraded from Ubuntu to the (IMHO) much more stylish and functional Kubuntu - featuring the KDE desktop. KDE is one of many free desktop systems available for Ubuntu. Which one you use is purely a matter of personal choice - something else greatly lacking in the Windows arena.

Since 2007 May, we have purchased 3 Lenovos and dumped Vista on all 3 machines in favour of Kubuntu. In addition we are gradually migrating all our Windows PC's to Kubuntu as well. I am at my wits end with constant upgrading, security patching of Windows operating systems. I am sorry to say that Vista is one seriously-flawed operating system too many for us and I am utterly sick of all the broken promises from Microsoft.

(K)ubuntu has made migrating to Linux really easy for us. So easy that my non-techy girlfriend was able to install a complete Hungarian language version of Ubuntu for her sister in Hungary, including Skype and all the other doodads, whistles & bells in just over half an hour.

There are still issues with drivers for scanners etc, but these are gradually being resolved. Our few "must have" Windows applications, such as ThumbsPlus, Adobe PageMaker and Microsoft Access will all run adequately on Linux by using CrossoverOffice from Codeweavers (costs around 25 quid). Infact MS Access on Linux is actually faster than on Windows! Seriously!

All our other data can be handled perfectly adequately using the fantastic array of free, open source applications available for Linux - such as OpenOffice (opens and saves M$ Word, Excel & Powerpoint files), Gwenview (for managing photos), Amorok (for MP3's) Kaffiene (for playing DVD's and other movie files).

There is also a fantastic array of free, open source educational software that is unrivalled on Windows. The support one gets from the Ubuntu community is far superior to anything you can expect from Micro$oft.

If you are happy with XP then fine, stick with it. However if you are either struggling with Vista, or considering "upgrading" to Vista (and I use the word "upgrading" loosely) then you should seriously consider one of the new Linuxes instead. My view is that if one has the hassle of learning something new then why not make this intellectual effort really worthwhile?

My remaining niggle is that presumably I must have paid for all these unwanted Vista OEM licences? Clearly Vista is not of merchantable quality. So I wonder how I can get my money back? I feel a letter to the Office of Fair Trading coming on!

Best wishes, G.

How much are M$ paying you to write this nonsense, Randall?

Well, at least you're likely to win two journalism awards for this piece: "Most Clueless Linux Review of the Year" and "Most Blatant Vista Fanboy". Well done, you.

I'll start with page one on my comment. Question is this ---> So is that what we pay for in vista, $250 for a new improved search mech?

If you don't know where your files are, you shouldn't use a computer.

I have tried Ubuntu on my personal PC and it does about anything I need, but in our business environment there are too many pieces missing. I can't sell Linux and Open Office to an IT Director that is looking at a centrally managed network with all office apps, e-mail, and Web access integrated together and installed in a single 5 minute process.

Come on, guys. Yes, I know, you love your Ubuntu, and I do as well, but cut back a bit on the childish behaviour. Ubuntu aint perfect, at least not yet. There's no need to throw a tantrum every time somebody tells us that Ubuntu lacks a feature or some polish in some regard. Get over it.
Sometimes I think it's the rabid Linux convertites among us that are Ubuntu's biggest problem.

I got Vista with my new computer. I really love it.

Granted I wouldn't pay for it (i'd pirate it instead). But nonetheless, I wouldn't go to Gusty from Vista. If you think Gutsy has more visual appeal than Vista, you are clearly wrong.

The guy Jason said it right. There are too many useless distros and unless you all pool together into one kickass distro, it will always be a HOBBY OS.

Glad you are pleased with your new system. However, I'm not quite sure what you mean by "HOBBY OS" or "kickass distro"? If you are implying that Ubuntu is inadequate for business use then you are mistaken, certainly in our case.

We dumped Vista, mainly because of its appallingly slug-like performance, in favour of Kubuntu Linux. We now run fast, reliable, stable secure machines, with no viruses, worms spies or any of the other nasties associated with Windows.

I cannot speak for other people but as far as we are concerned, breaking our "Microsoft habit" and embracing open source was one of the best business decisions we ever made.

Best wishes, G.

I have tried Ubuntu since Fiesty Fawn and now Gnipping Gnu-gnu or whatever the latest one is. All I can say is I should not have to know one iota of programming or command line junk to get stuff to work, like my printers. I should not have to use a terminal like its 1989 and point to a directory after logging in as root (or using "sudo" which sounds like a japanese foodstuff or martial art of some sort), and be editing a bunch of gibberish code of which I have no idea and don't freaking want to. I could care less about learning to program. I want to point and click and communicate in english, not in robot.

So, linux people can either remain snobs and keep saying how linux is not windows and shouldn't be compared, or can make the OS actually work so we can get rid of stinky windows once and for all. I compare linux to windows because I am dying for something to replace windows, so yes I want Windows but better, which linux can be. Linux needs to be as easy to use as windows so even grandmas and plumbers can boot up, log into the internet, print crap, and not have to learn unix code to do it, especially when something goes wrong.

Point and click people, point and click.

Some plumbers out there have no doubt taken offense to this last posting.

Some grandmas have taken offense, too. I know more about PCs and operating systems than a greasy plumber.

Yes. Ubuntu's search feature is not as good as Vista's. Therefore Ubuntu must suck in every way imaginable.

I hope Randall Kennedy chokes on a cock and dies so that no more B.S. can spew from his mouth.

Please stop sucking up for Microsoft!

One thing I know for sure, a lot of people (including myself) moved from Windows to Ubuntu because of Vista.

Good grief you Ubuntu fanboys give Linux a bad name! The personal attacks on the columnist are ridiculous! I run Kubuntu myself, and am refusing to run Vista for as long as possible, so to be clear I am a major Ubuntu/Kubuntu fanboy myself.

But the childish attacks on the author of the review are inane! You guys aren't winning anyone over - if anything, you are giving the Ubunutu meme a very bad name. Thanks for nothing!

-Scott

Linux is a great OS. It really is. It's just not well suited for desktops since it is not a consumer OS. Ubuntu is just another Linux distribution, where most of the money poured into it went into marketing and promotion campaings, so little has actually changed in the landscape.

You want a Linux that does not suck? Ask Apple for the right way to do it, they know the formula and everyone else willing to admit it know it too. The problem, of course, is that developing and supporting an entire OS with a unified vision is way more expensive and harder than simply collecting and assembling a set of assorted and badly integrated software components.

That's why Ubuntu, and Linux on the desktop, sucks so badly.

Sorry Scott Fraser, but maybe the author should not have called the article "Why Ubuntu (Still) Sucks" if he didn't want the abuse. Respect runs both ways.

Debian Linux and it's offspring (Ubuntu) are top shelf products and do not need to offer apologies to those people who cannot or care to understand Linux. To these people, please keep using Microsuck products. You deserve them.

har. har. har. (umgah humor)

I can't help but laugh at these Microsoft paid reviewers.

Randall, there are more factors to look at in an Operating system. I would bet Ubuntu is good in many of them.

Just wait if Linuxs becomes more populair. Like red hat en Suse there will be a time you have to pay for linux. For Suse I have to pay 600 euros per year per server. Further it takes a lot of work to get something done eg make ubuntu to start with a gui. Days of googleing. Ok I am new with Linux but always bashing MS is stupid too in my opinion

The linux distros are all easy to do, but when finished you need sometimes to get the gui working..... That can take quit a while. If there is a distro which can als provide quality setups of software which can be installed be everyone than linux might work. Further I can not say which distro is the best. The weakness is that there are too many distros. Further if you want to buy a commercial ditstro like redhat or suse you pay 600 euro per server per year! That is more than MS! And imagine that linux becomes the major OS I bet you have to pay for using the software. All developers must earn something.

@Piet
Have you ever tried Ubuntu? Even Redhat and SUSE that you are talking about work out of the box. The UI comes up automatically. I dont know when you last tried linux. Or probably you used some age old distro. Come on wake up..

I switched to Ubuntu Feisty in July of this year after the last and record breaking last intall of XP SP2 before having to do a full re-install and before then i made a vow to try out ubuntu fully since i have the time and at the time i did, and i mean fully installed - worked great and wonderful, tried earlier versions - sucked and I was NOT ready then and well so far I upgraded to Gutsy from feisty - 5months record except for the first times i had to re-install because of my own stupidy..;P

Besides that as stated above, then i got fed up with the upgrading part and backed up some - forgot to do some but then well that's my fault and then fully installed - worked great except 2.6.22-14 kernel sucks, but still better than windows XP SP2, i removed tracker and I use places - search for files or if I'm in a terminal or command line i use locate and I both run updatedb manually and locate to locate files. :)

So far I agree with some above keeping ur files/folders organzied makes it where u don't have to do searches that often. Yes i removed a lot I did NOT use and also if anyone is wondering Linux is the OS Ubuntu is the GUI part and also Linux keeps some saved space and with Gutsy it's rougly 3gb so u don't run out of room, unfortuanly i deleted by accident a file i had with it in it, -i backup manually file/folder,etc.. to another HD and well i made an error in judgement and lost it and my tmp notes, I keep a tmp file txt on my desktop for pasting things I will keep or want to - mostly commands, etc.. for later if I need em..Oh well that was my fault and NO restore for EXT3 or it's basically harder to do so and then it's a really tough chance to get it back..oh well..

Mov. on B.O.T ---> I plan on updaing to ubuntus 2.6.23 or 2.6.24 kernels which ever makes it into the kernel for Hardy and yes Gutsys default kernel has issues with some sites and does have performance problems and so forth and i hear and have a bit tried the 2.6.23 kernel from debian and it is faster so i'm waiting for that..

Overall tho Gutsy is easy and if u open of gconf-editor / configuration editor and browse thru there u'll find some things that don't have a button in their own program, etc.. :)

App.to/App. allowing is a no no with linux, however i am using arno-iptables firewall and am learning iptables, etc.. and the rules.. So far I have a website http://www.freewebs.com/gutsygibbon which shows some tips and tricks, etc.. :) for Gutsy and so forth..

I have been feeling @home with Ubuntu linux which used to I was with XP SP2 and well i'm forgetting about windows and how it is and yes I can go without the games i once had - low priority...and love the simple ones that one can get in the repos and love my set-up and gnome - I only customized it a bit because i liked it already 'cause it's simple and nice and love the background I made which fits with simplicity and love the tweaks i found on the net.