What Is So Good About Linux?

After hearing good things about Ubuntu Linux, I finally tried it and I must say, what is so good about it? Let me state my reasons for disliking it.

- No Microsoft Office, not 2007 at least
- No Photoshop
- Much slower download speeds
- WiFi LED would not stop blinking, searched high and low for a fix to no avail
- Laptop would overheat

I suppose I should add that the version I used was 8.10, which may or may not make a difference.

In conclusion, I was disappointed. Don't get me wrong, there were some pretty cool features I must admit, but they couldn't make up for problems I had. I tried so hard to like it, but it didn't happen. I am not biased, I just prefer Windows XP, atleast until they change some things.

Discuss.

 

-Ubuntu comes pre installed with Open Office, EXACT SAME THING as office maybe even better.
-Ubuntu comes pre installed with Gimp, like photoshop, if you still want to use photoshop then use Wine to run it.
-maybe its YOUR connection
-seems to be your laptop thats the prob.
-same as above.

 

I can understand that you would get that impression, however

-If OpenOffice is so good, please explain why PowerPoint presentations don't display properly in it. The same PowerPoint presentation displays fine in MS Office in XP
-I attempted to use Wine and it's not all it's cracked up to be, only 1/3 programs I attempted to install worked, and the only one that worked was a small program
-My download speeds were at least twice as fast and are again back in XP
-My Laptop is now half as hot
-After doing some research in the Ubuntu forums and google, it seems the blinking WiFi LED is a feature to show traffic flow but for me, the fact that it can't be disabled is simply annoying

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to belittle Linux, but it seems these problems are associated with, and I don't understand why it's seen as such a good operating system, I feel that it's over-rated, which is the point behind this thread. If these problems were non-existent then I would gladly use Ubuntu.

 

First up, Linux isn't Windows. Windows applications aren't designed to run on Linux, blame the application vendor, not Linux developers.

That said, there are free replacements for Office and Photoshop that run natively. OpenOffice and Gimp in this example.

Are you sure you want to run Office 2007 anyway? The OOXML in Office 2007 doesn't even comply with Microsoft's own OOXML "standard" yet to the best of my knowledge. Not to mention that by using .docx nobody else can open it unless they have 2007 too. The day is fast approaching that OpenOffice will have better compatibility with legacy Office documents than even Office does - Microsoft is trying to kill off VBA. Unless you rely heavily on macros, OpenOffice is good enough.

As far as I'm concerned, unless you legally own a license for Photoshop, you have practically no right to complain about Photoshop not running on Linux. If you've got the cash to splash around for Photoshop, you can afford to purchase a supporting OS, the OS is inexpensive compared to the price tag of Photoshop, so quit being a cheapskate. For everyone else, Gimp is good enough.

Download speed and wireless blinking sounds like a driver issue. A number of wireless chipset manufacturers don't directly support Linux. I'm sure you're not the only person with your laptop, there will be information on getting better stability on the net if you're prepared to look and learn. Ultimately, you need to research hardware before buying it with Linux in mind. It is actually more surprising that it works at all.

Laptop overheating... No real experience, you don't have a Toshiba do you? Mostly it is a vendor problem, laptops can have lots of little peculiarities, requiring custom patches for each new model. Again, research before buying and support vendors who support Linux. Windows support will likely be better too because they will use more heavily tested drivers there too.

My recommendation? Next time you buy, buy keeping Linux in mind. Just expecting Linux to work will be hit and miss and you'll just be disappointed. Ultimately it is up to you. If you put in the effort to learn and get things working, it will be rewarding.

I personally started using Linux because I have a conscience (and fear of being sued), and the price of Windows + Office + everything else was ridiculous. I keep using Linux because of the freedom, no DRM, no restrictions on what I do, ability to get under the hood and tinker (not that I do, but the option is there, and that I care about). Everyone has their own reason for using it.

 

As for Powerpoint presentations not working, you're using a proprietary Microsoft file format which isn't fully documented. I could just as rightfully complain that a presentation I create natively in OpenOffice doesn't work at all in Microsoft Office. Microsoft has full access to the specification, WHY don't they officially support it?

 

Please go back and re-read my post, I edited in some things after you posted. Office has a plugin that resolves compatibility issues and another plugin that can save as PDFs and XPFs, so I believe you are exaggerating that issue.

 

I believe the plugin you refer to was developed by the same people behind OpenOffice, not Microsoft. So should we not blame Microsoft for not supplying a plugin that makes Microsoft documents work in OpenOffice? The core issue still remains - document incompatibility is the fault of Microsoft pushing proprietary formats. You asked for reasons for Linux? This is a major one for a lot of people. Proprietary formats are bad, the lock-in ties you to Microsoft's product life cycle, as the almost forced upgrade to 2007 demonstrates.

Will you still be able to open that file in 10 years time? What about 100 years or 1000 years if it is an important historical document? If Office is no longer sold, the specifications are unknown. It is sad indeed that ancient hieroglyphics are easier to read than obsolete file formats from just the last couple of decades.

 

Case in point Mick..

In 1987 a group spent millions writing and collating a "new" domesday book.. mirroring the one from 1087 and marking the millennium .. unfortunately, they chose to use the (then) state of the art technology for optical data storage of the day.. 12" laserdisks.....

They would have done better writing it on cured goatskins.... game over XD

Anyway.. I detect M$ trolls in action.. heres a gem I came up with to kick them fair and square in the bollocks time and time again

PPA's reasons why FOSS will ALWAYS be better than any closed payware you dare to name.....

Because it is written by people who need to do something. It isn't written for profit or any commercial gain, it is made purely to fill a need of the writer, who having filled that need decides to give it away to others in the hope they might also find it useful..
The writer doesn't care if it is pretty, and doesn't care that it doesn't do what you want it to do.. and that you don't have the skills to make it work... that's not the point of it.. and the writer very often will not help you to make it work... it works for them, and that's all that ultimately matters. It's totally free to you, and you are free to modify it and hack it about in any way you see fit.. so long as you just note and credit the originator..

Payware on the other hand.. is made poorly requiring you to but a new version every year or so.. there is nothing you can do to make it better without breaking all kinds of IP and copyright and reverse engineering laws.. so you are stuffed both ways.. a substandard product you have bought, that you don't have any rights to modify to make work in the way you need...

Now which.. seriously.. is better??

 

Think this about sums it up

 

Do you really want to use that proprietary file format?
http://friendsofopendocument.com/resources/ODF-for-libraries-Oct06.pdf

 

Just because something is programmed for profit, doesn't mean it's poorly designed. I simply don't see the logic or your reasoning in that. If something is for profit, it's the designers goal to make it good, or it simply won't sell.

When something is designed for non-profit, open source, it's likely the bare minimum. If the designer isn't making profit from it, they are not going to devote their life to making a superb program. Also, I'm not advocating piracy but everyone and their dog knows how to acquire pirated software.

 

No, as it is programmed for profit, it will only ever be "good enough". There are only limited resources available to design and support code through its life cycle before the next project comes along. Technical perfection is a labor of love that goes beyond dollar value, which can often only be achieved by someone passionate about the topic. It might not be aesthetically perfect (which will be an issue for the proprietary model), but it WILL do what it was designed for perfectly, at least in the eyes of the person doing it.

 

Who mentioned piracy??.. the mantra of the M$ troll

don't like getting caught with yer pants down do you, and especially by a girl LMFAO!!

payware is badly built.. otherwise how will they sell you next years "upgrade"?? norton antivirus is a great example of something being expensive and bad.. same as M$ office.. and come to think of it windoze... the linux I run has been updated sequentially for over 8 years involving no loss of data and nothing that used to work suddenly stopping working.......

oops.. somebody just ran into irc *nix gang warfare :lol:

 

That document is absurd. How is it not possible to read a Word document from five years ago. It simply requires a plug-in for Office 2007, as I already stated.

I also want to add that Microsoft Windows XP, which I am running on my laptop, hasn't crashed on me I don't think once and neither has a Microsoft designed software, so simply stating that Microsoft made products are poorly designed and crash all the time, is ludicrous. Granted, there are some cases in which this happens but this is slim to none.

 

So who is going to write that plugin if/when Microsoft goes bust? You haven't disproved the scenario by any means. The document is entirely relevant, in particular the case example of the NASA records.

 

I don't think you have a valid argument. How is OpenOffice, which is a free, open source if I'm not mistaken, program, better than Microsoft Office? If you had read my original post, you would know the trouble I had with OpenOffice not properly displaying PowerPoint presentations, as it was designed to do, which the two of you have so clearly stated. How is GIMP, a free open source software, better than Adobe Photoshop, a non-free, non-open source application?

 

"Microsoft going bust"? Not likely. The plug-in is already written and that document you presented is simply false, or the people trying to read an old document are computer-illiterate.

 

NASA probably didn't think the company that provided the machine in question in that report would ever disappear either. I'm asking who is going to write the plugin for Microsoft Office 2025, and the additional plugins for Office 2025 that are required to support Office 97, XP, 2003, 2007, 2010, 2013, 2016, 2019, 2022, 2025. There is only a limited amount of money to devote to supporting legacy formats, and at some point, the plug gets pulled, designing engineers pass on, and the format is forgotten about. Software itself is another example, Vista has enough problems running software designed for XP. Windows 7 (beta) even has issues running software designed for Vista. So, when support for the format dries up, you need to be able to run the old version of Office that last had support. Then you need to run the old version of Windows that can support your Office. And then hardware compatibility is going to be an issue too, so you need to have a machine mothballed away that can run said office suite. THIS IS EXACTLY THE ISSUE IN THE NASA EXAMPLE. The support demands are unsustainable. End of the day, OpenOffice is full-featured when using the file formats it was designed to. Call that a tie: MS Office is full-featured when using MS file types. The kicker is that the file formats in OpenOffice are OPEN STANDARDS. The files can be read by others without needing to pay, the files will be able to be read into eternity as they aren't in some obscure binary format, and the standards are documented such that in 50 years time a tool can be easily written to view the file as intended. I call that a conclusive win for using OpenOffice with native file formats. I couldn't give a rats arse that it can't open a Powerpoint document 100% perfect. Create your file as a .odp in OpenOffice and insist everyone else use OpenOffice to view it, it isn't like it costs them anything, and they will see it exactly as intended. And don't start spouting that that forces them to install software, using Powerpoint also forces people to install (AND PURCHASE) software, it just happens to have a higher userbase. It takes time to topple a monopoly, you don't seem to grasp the bigger picture friend.

Have you actually USED Gimp? Again, it is built by enthusiasts who KNOW what they need, unless you're doing very high end work, it gets the job done. As per my first post, I suspect you have absolutely no grounds to complain about Photoshop in any case. Just because you can steal a Ferrari doesn't mean a car that someone is giving away is any less capable. Do you think a judge would care for a minute if you got busted and used the argument that the Ferrari was better, so you had no option but to steal it? Beggars can't be choosers.

I'm unsubscribing from the thread, good luck with your Windows. Those of us who actually have some ethics are quite happy with the alternatives, maybe one day you'll understand.

 

Just wanted to add: http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/22/sad-day-for-microsoft-5000-laid-off-earnings-and-revenues-down/

There has been a massive exodus of long standing executives the past few years too, like rats deserting a sinking ship. The end game of open source is that all core software is free. Microsoft in its current form cannot exist is such an environment. It might take 50 years, but I don't see Microsoft being a big player in this new world, they need to reinvent themselves like Apple have.