Ubuntu Linux Vs. Windows Vista: The Battle For Your Desktop

[Digit_Dragon]

Check out who is the winner

http://www.informationweek.com/news/...no=1&queryText=

[prasad_den]

To me, ubuntu wins hands down, coz its good, and its free..!! No vista for me at least for quite some time.. And XP does its work very well till now..!!

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

for me XP works fine , i'll shift to Vista when i get the hardware to run it .

well Ubuntu is good too but not for normal "Home" uses who do a lil bit of gaming , music n multimedia . that's my thinking . although it is "Very Good" for offices where you need to do a specialized task n there it can be customized to do a single task or a set of tasks n then deployed .

[Kiran.dks]

Nice comprehensive article.
The last quote by the reviewer is very true.

Ubuntu's best strength is handling the ordinary task-based day-to-day stuff. Vista has a level of completeness and polish that some people find it hard to do without.

[amitava82]

Many people say Ubuntu is not polished as Vista which is i must admit is true in certain cases. But they often forget that Vista took more than 15 years to come to current Polished stage from Windows 3.0 (I'm leaving Windows 1.0, 1985), where as Ubuntu is merely 3 Years old. There is a Huge time advantage for Windows. Also I'm leaving out driver issue, mp3 etc... everyone knows the fact. I'm pretty much confident that by the time Microsoft releases next version of Desktop OS Ubuntu will be as Polished as Vista.

I find that the author of this comparison, actually went out of his way to trash Linux. In the beginning he claims to put aside his own bias, and then IMHO fails to do so. For example, he criticizes Ubuntu for not having his HP printer driver... even while admitting that Vista didn't have a native driver either. This is neither the fault of either OS developer groups, its HP's problem, yet he gives points to Vista for this and takes a dig at Ubuntu for not having it. Actually Ubuntu developers works more harder than Microsoft developer. They just Borrow drivers from the product manufacturers where as Ubuntu developers have to reverse engineer to get a working driver.

Also the author left out Synaptic package manager saying its for Advanced users (Whats so advanced in it???) and Comparing Windows "add remove programs" tools with Ubuntu "add remove" tools...

one more comment I'd like to quote from a poste which is very true.. The saying - "Linux is not ready for the desktop" is SO wrong ! Its not linux ! Linux has been desktop ready for years now ! Its the userbase thats not ready for desktop linux. Please remember that Linux is not windows, so don't expect it to operate like Windows. Linux hasnt been built to mimic windows's operability. Its a different O/S in its own right - Please treat it that way.

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

Originally Posted by amitava82

Actually Ubuntu developers works more harder than Microsoft developer. They just Borrow drivers from the product manufacturers where as Ubuntu developers have to reverse engineer to get a working driver.

well i'l agree to that but It's not MS Developer's problem , if ubuntu developers agree to ship with propreitary drivers rather than insist on having Open Source drivers then i think their work will be much easier too n they can concentratre more on the usability part .

[aryayush]

Windows Vista would be the clear winner for most people and I don't think they would be wrong.

[iMav]

Originally Posted by amitava82

Many people say Ubuntu is not polished as Vista which is i must admit is true in certain cases. But they often forget that Vista took more than 15 years to come to current Polished stage from Windows 3.0 (I'm leaving Windows 1.0, 1985), where as Ubuntu is merely 3 Years old.

no open source OS is as polished as vista and open source has been around before windows

[gxsaurav]

Originally Posted by amitava82

Many people say Ubuntu is not polished as Vista which is i must admit is true in certain cases. But they often forget that Vista took more than 15 years to come to current Polished stage from Windows 3.0 (I'm leaving Windows 1.0, 1985), where as Ubuntu is merely 3 Years old. There is a Huge time advantage for Windows. Also I'm leaving out driver issue, mp3 etc... everyone knows the fact. I'm pretty much confident that by the time Microsoft releases next version of Desktop OS Ubuntu will be as Polished as Vista.

Well, if you are considering that Windows 3.0 to Windows Vista time frame as 15 years then why don't you also consider Linux kernal 1.0 to kernal 2.6 timeframe too

KDE 1.0 to KDE 3.5 time frame too

GNOME 1.0 to GNOME current version time frame too.

[amitava82]

We are comparing Ubuntu with Vista and their usability NOT the kernel (BTW its not kernal) or desktop environment. if you want to compare kernel then there is already a thread comparing both the kernel with a link if you remember and the time frame would be 1985 VS 1991. Try to do fair comparison
BTW KDE: 1996, GNOME: 1997

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

Originally Posted by amitava82

We are comparing Ubuntu with Vista and their usability NOT the kernel (BTW its not kernal) or desktop environment. if you want to compare kernel then there is already a thread comparing both the kernel with a link if you remember and the time frame would be 1985 VS 1991. Try to do fair comparison
BTW KDE: 1996, GNOME: 1997

well mate if you're no comparing kernel then u should count development of vista to be after the last release of the OS , n that would be Windows XP with SP2 in September 2004 , then according to this Vista took just 3 years to come from the drawing board to the floor .

also if u consider the 2001 Release date of XP , then too vista took 6 years to be released , now that would be fair competition bcoz the 15 years u're counting include the development of Windows Kernel too n not just vista , also Vista Includes an almost completely reqritten kernel so development time would be taken no more than before 2001 .

[gxsaurav]

Actually MS scraped the old Longhorn 4xxx builds with Plex skin which was based on Windows XP SP2 kernel with Windows server 2003 Kernel in 2003

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

Originally Posted by gx_saurav

Actually MS scraped the old Longhorn 4xxx builds with Plex skin which was based on Windows XP SP2 kernel with Windows server 2003 Kernel in 2003

i was gonna mention that but i thought that linux user's might not have that info n then i would hv to cite sources , etc , etc so i refrained

[amitava82]

So just wikipedia told u n u believed that MS didn't use any references from previous windows.. Its like "climbing a tree from top" or "Intel developed core 2 duo without developing P1".... Dude just use common sense.. people do not achieve everything in a flash.. It's Called EXPERIENCE that helps... If MS Developers didn't have references and access to previous Windows sources then it would have taken more than 12 years to develop Vista. Hope u guys have little business sense. u guys go visit some companies n talk to the people there. This will help you to think Logically. Just don't talk like Fanboy.

May be off topic but here is few lines from a case study I'm doing from business week September 8 2003

Security experts and corporate tech purchasers say the glitches exist because Microsoft and other software companies have placed a high priority on getting products out quickly and loading them with features, rather than attending to security. They're calling on the industry -- and Microsoft in particular -- to make software more secure. Ralph Szygenda, chief information officer at General Motors Corp., got fed up when his computers were hit by the Nimda virus in late 2001. He called Microsoft executives. "I told them I'm going to move away from Windows," Szygenda recalls. "They started talking about security all of a sudden."

Last year, amid much fanfare, Microsoft launched its Trustworthy Computing initiative, a campaign it claimed would put security at the core of its software design. As part of the campaign, more than 8,500 Microsoft engineers stopped developing the upcoming Windows Server 2003 and conducted a security analysis of millions of lines of freshly written code. Microsoft ultimately spent $200 million on beefing up security in Windows Server 2003 alone. "It's a fundamental change in the way we write software," says Mike Nash, vice-president for security business. "If there was some way we could spend more money or throw more people on it, believe me, we'd do it." Yet, embarrassingly, Windows Server 2003, released in April, was one of the operating systems exploited by Blaster. The virus carried a snide message for Microsoft Chairman William H. Gates III: "Billy Gates why do you make this possible? Stop making money and fix your software!"

Too much for security..

[gxsaurav]

Amit

What are you trying to say here? We all know that Vista is using old source code too, only with Vienna the kernel will be re-written from scratch.

Now if you care comparing that to Linux, then isn't Linux kernel also using code from kernel version 0.1?

[iMav]

no point these guys dont understand fairness ..... ubuntu abhi bahi aya ... vista toh 1990 mein hi ban gaya tha ... this statement is more ridiculous than any provided by even the apple fan boys

and look whos talking about business sense

kuch nahi bacha toh chalo vista ki security ke piche ....

[mediator]

Why doesn't the author say anything about Gaming on VISTA? Is he afraid to reveal something?

DRM gives power to Microsoft and Big Media.

* They decide which programs you can and can't use on your computer
* They decide which features of your computer or software you can use at any given moment
* They force you to install new programs even when you don't want to (and, of course, pay for the privilege)
* They restrict your access to certain programs and even to your own data files

Source

Then some reviews
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...15451#comments
http://www.intelliadmin.com/blog/200...-of-vista.html

Then a major embarassment which almost everyone seems to be complaining about and which shud have been corrected in alpha testing stage itself, forget about beta!



And now for the article!

Is Linux finally ready to take on Windows as a desktop OS? We tried out both Vista and Ubuntu on individual PCs to see which works better. Here's who won.

So, I think the appropriate question is "IS VISTA ready to take on Xp?".

And I dunno whats the hype about being polished. The VISTA screenshots that I have seen on my friends PCs is nuthing but same as that of Xp with a little styleXP on it. THe screenshots that I see on ubuntuforums regularly look much more amazing than that! So the question that arises in my mind is that "Is VISTA finally ready to take on latest linux distros in the "polish" department"?

So since windows fanboys here usually talk about and give an excuse of average joe, then let me remind that average joe isn't concerned about the cause of "driver problems", "90% games not working", "why his file takes so much time to copy" and lots of other issues. So desktop experience on VISTA?

I think its better to discuss about UBUNTU Vs VISTA on desktop after SP2 of VISTA!

[gxsaurav]

I think I should post again an eye opener

1) 90% of games won't work On vista? Did someone tried palying those games again after installing DirectX 9c Feb 2007 package or newer on Windows Vista to get back the DirectX 9 libraries?

DRM gives power to Microsoft and Big Media.

* They decide which programs you can and can't use on your computer
* They decide which features of your computer or software you can use at any given moment
* They force you to install new programs even when you don't want to (and, of course, pay for the privilege)
* They restrict your access to certain programs and even to your own data files

Again saying it, Microsoft must follow the rules imposed by EU, RIAA & MPAA. Why don't you blame them?

MS doesn't decide which program you run & which U don't. If this was the case then the Virus problem will seaze to exist on Windows platform cos Virus is also a program.

They don't decide, MPAA & RIAA does. They must support what these companies say else MS will be sued & closed.

You have all the freedom now to install any application that you do not want. They don't send there workers to your home & tell you to install WGA update on gun point. Comon Linux users talk in proper sence.

And seriously Dude, when the hell MS resitrcited anyone from using there own files? This is just stupid, written bliendly by some Anti-MS user .

The File copy bug is indeed a bug, but read again that thread. There is a fix already posted there.

Just linking to other articles on the internet won't help. Talk with your own experience

Just that, other OS users will never try to figure out things from the inside. Saying that Vista is just XP with a new skin is indeed stupid when you don't even know how many new technologies are there inside vista

[mediator]

Just linking to other articles on the internet won't help. Talk with your own experience

Eggjactly! And I think this is exactly what was going on before I entered...people talking with half knowledge? As u can see, I never posted my experience with VISTA save the desktop screenshots part.
And here we have users who r talking about "polishness" and talking about "Ubuntu's best strength is handling the ordinary task-based day-to-day stuff." etc. There r plenty of people in the world who do everything that they want to do on Ubuntu. How come is that ordinary task-based day-to-day stuff?

So I think people shud spend the same time they spent with windows (or atleast 1 year or a few months in extreme) before talking about Ubuntu and vice versa. I hope the messege was quite "sensible" and clear.

[iMav]

atleast we have some sane linux users also

[sabret00the]

I've used XP - too good
I've used ubuntu - good but driver issues
I've used Vista - Good but filled with bugs

[infra_red_dude]

i tried vista a while ago, but uninstalled it before the trial period expired. back on my xp now. i'd say xp is a more mature OS than vista. of corz it has taken time. as somebody said vista needs some time to settle downl so may new technologies haf come up. we need time for developers to release better code compatible wid it. we need to give some time for it to mature. only then a comparision can be made. i'm a longtime windows user. been using it since the days of windows 3.1!

unless an OS has stable drivers how can u perform some real world tests on it. wait for a while. let the companies ship tested and stable drivers. then let us compare.

btw, ubuntu is a mature os, i must say. again linux was never designed to lure windows users. i've used linux from the dayz of slackware 2.2.. when it came in floppies to ubuntu 7.10. i think linux has matured over the years from being geek only to layman friendly today. hmmm.. but i think as long as we dun get distros like sabayon/dreamlinux/freespire it'll not be as popular as windows for the average joe.

i think ubuntu shud release a non-oss version which contains free software (may not necessarily be oss, but free like codecs, drivers etc.) imagine an ubuntu distro which doesn't require u to download codecs, drivers etc. which will work will all video cards, provide hardware accn. using closed source but free drivers, play all types of multimedia files etc. who wudn't want a distro like that working out of the box and which is legal too, it wud be irresistable!! the installation of the not-included stuff and configuring is what scares away most of the users. i think the whole community needs to re-think and introduce a lot of changes in the software released. just like freespire does, let them release 2 versions. one completely OSS and other wid oss+free closed source software. this will only help in gaining more popularity and first time users will not shy away from it as even almost all of the CLI ops are now gui based.

some very well worked on desktops i've seen in linux:

http://ubuntuforums.org/gallery/show...php/photo/1733
http://ubuntuforums.org/gallery/show...php/photo/3820
http://ubuntuforums.org/gallery/show...php/photo/5095
http://ubuntuforums.org/gallery/show...php/photo/1744

this is what will make first time users feel at home. given them a familiar interface, let them play any media file.. everything out of the box. then show them the power of customisation.

[iMav]

its very difficult to lure users with only codecs playing media files ... ubuntu, slax all of them are trying their level best to make their distros appeal to a normal windows user by trying to make the distros look and feel like windows but unless things are not simplified linux wont be able to cut the ice ... its very difficult for any user to shift to a new os and find that 90% of the things he knew how to operate on a windows box are entirely different on linux and unless ease of use is not given priority it wont help the cause

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

Originally Posted by amitava82

So just wikipedia told u n u believed that MS didn't use any references from previous windows.. Its like "climbing a tree from top" or "Intel developed core 2 duo without developing P1".... Dude just use common sense.. people do not achieve everything in a flash.. It's Called EXPERIENCE that helps... If MS Developers didn't have references and access to previous Windows sources then it would have taken more than 12 years to develop Vista. Hope u guys have little business sense. u guys go visit some companies n talk to the people there. This will help you to think Logically. Just don't talk like Fanboy.

that's what i wanted to say , then y don't u also consider development time of ubuntu to include that of the Development of the Linux kernel from scratch .

Also Ubuntu is based on debian , the developer's didn't make it from scratch , does this ring a bell Amitav , also Mark Shuttleworth didn't even hire new developers , he just took some from the Debian team , these developers too had earlier experience with linux development and had the Debian Source Code before them , now wouldn't that be unfair according to you

[iMav]

let it be zeeshan next he is gonna say ... viena was already coded wen MS released windows 98

[praka123]

Originally Posted by infra_red_dude

i think ubuntu shud release a non-oss version which contains free software (may not necessarily be oss, but free like codecs, drivers etc.)

Linux Mint is the distro for that!-based on Ubuntu Feisty.

http://linuxmint.com/
even there are many custom Ubuntu's there-like multimedia edition,Christian,Moslem Edition!!

Open Source Rules!!Free Software Rules!!

[mediator]

WTH, Ubuntu is being used to embrace religions now?

[Zeeshan Quireshi]

Originally Posted by mAV3

let it be zeeshan next he is gonna say ... viena was already coded wen MS released windows 98

wow , similarly one of my friends said that he had some insider news that MS had coded successor to XP even before it released Win 98 and said that it was Microsoft's monopoly that it wasn't releasing newer versions .

PS: he said this bout 2 years ago , then he was new to computers n was one of those newly-introduced to Linux , n u know how those kinda ppl are

[amitava82]

Originally Posted by Zeeshan Quireshi

Vista took just 3 years to come from the drawing board to the floor.

Well mate thats what you are telling..

[iMav]

^^prove otherwise ...