 | Operating System Coexistence May 13, 2008 1:38pm in tech |
So many people can get caught up in the operating system war that they may forget that multiple operating systems can coexist side by side. Many times people are so pro-Windows, or so pro-Linux, or even pro-Mac that they believe that their operating system has to be the end-all winner in the computer world. Ubuntu just 2 weeks ago released their first version of 2008, Ubuntu 8.04 keyed Hardy Heron. I now have it installed as the primary and only operating system on my file server and have it set up for dual booting on my desktop along with Windows Vista. So far I have nothing but kind words to say about it as it has run very smoothly for me. In fact, it's the first version of Ubuntu that installed properly and just worked on my new Desktop hardware that I got back in December for Christmas. My server since switching over to Linux from Windows has only ever really used Ubuntu starting out with 6.06 and then 7.10 and now 8.04. For me, it is stable, efficient, fast, and properly integrates with my entire home network pretty much flawlessly. It is the only operating system to date that I've worked with that can reach 30 days of uptime without a restart and still work without hiccups. I've even got it up to 100 days before and it probably would've lasted longer had my hard drive not died and my need to get into the box. And now that whatever issue my desktop was having with Ubuntu 7.04 and 7.10, has been fixed in 8.04 so it now "just works" on my desktop too. In fact, as I've said earlier, if it wasn't for games, I'd be booted into Linux a lot more than I am now. This gets me to my point, Ubuntu, whether you like it or not has catapaulted Linux into somewhat of a mainstream operating system. Yes, it will probably never get ahead of Windows, and with how Mac OS X is growing, it will probably stay behind Apple as well, but does it really matter what percentage of the market share Linux gets? Open source advocates and the Linux fanboys would say that it does, they tend to want Linux to win completely. They want to see Microsoft pretty much rot in hell. They end up so caught up in things that they fail to see that both Windows and Linux can coexist. And what would these fanboys say to those who want to play the latest and greatest computer games? Yes there is Cedega and Wine, both of which can do pretty decent jobs at running a lot of Windows games, but not all. And to get some of them to work can require a significant amount of tweaking and careful configuration that some users may not have time to do, or simply may not be saavy enough to do. While I would love to see Linux gain market share, I realize at the same time, that at this point in the game, Linux can be very tricky for many to use. Yes, Ubuntu makes the setup and installation quite simple that a lot of people could have success in doing it, but what about trickier issues that may arise? For the most part, I have had a good deal of success with driver support out of the box for my hardware, but what about those that may have some hardware that doesn't have proper driver support? The "easy" to set up, just got a lot trickier, even on Ubuntu. Sure, the Linux gurus and even those with only moderate experience would probably be able to solve those issues, but what about the "even you mother could use it" crowd? And this is where Linux still has its pitfalls, on the surface, Ubuntu is very easy and very smooth, and a lot of people may never have to get into the nitty gritty of the operating system. Even most configuration will work fine using the GUIs that now exist. But not everything goes that smoothly which is what can make Linux tricky. Ubuntu and Linux in general need to be able to improve upon its base and allow for those trickier situations to be handled in a more "ease-of-use" manner so that more of the general users can figure it out. Linux has a good group of followers and many I've found when going to message boards and forums for support to be very friendly and helpful to help me solve the problem, but not everyone wants to have to go there because a lot of solutions can require some heavy terminal useage that may scare the non-geek crowd. In the end, as much as I hate to say it, Linux is not for everyone, at least not yet. It is becoming a better alternative to Windows than it was say 5 years ago, but it is still not completely ready for mainstream useage yet. Us Linux fans can only hope that it steadily improves, where maybe one day, it will truly become a viable alternative to the ever-prominent Windows operating system. Tags: thoughts, linux, opensource, windows, ubuntu
|
Comments (7)
Carlie J. Coats, Jr. on May 14, 2008 3:56pm I've felt "just worked" for a decade now with Mandrake (now Mandriva). Of course, I have been somewhat careful about selecting my hardware in the first place. FWIW. | ||
Tom Dison on May 14, 2008 4:40pm The "easy" to set up, just got a lot trickier, even on Ubuntu. Sure, the Linux gurus and even those with only moderate experience would probably be able to solve those issues, but what about the "even you mother could use it" crowd? That issue always bothers me. Grandma may have trouble installing Ubuntu. Say what? Grandma is NEVER going to install Ubuntu. She is also never going to install WIndows. Why does this issue come up all the time? Only expert users install operating systems. And for experts, Ubuntu makes it relatively painless. This kind of comment reminds me of a review I read the other day, "Linux won't be ready for prime time until absolutley clueless computer newbies could sit down and instantly be productive. Say what? Those same users cannot be productive on WIndows either. They need an experienced user to help find their way. Why should Ubuntu be any different? | ||
Keith on May 14, 2008 4:49pm Carlie, you're right there, with careful consideration on hardware, systems can easily work out of the box easily, but sometimes you have to take into consideration, someone new wanting to try it out on a pre-built Dell computer that may have one part without hardware support. Support for drivers on Linux though has improved tremendously of late, so that's definitely a good thing. | ||
Keith on May 14, 2008 4:54pm Tom, you bring up a very good point that I didn't even think about, and you are definitely spot on there. I should've thought of that because I know people who struggle installing XP, so I think you're right on the misjudgement of the review you read. I think it's definitely slipping into the point where Linux can definitely start to be considered mainstream, and I hope more computer companies start following Dell and offering Linux to come with computers, or at least build computers that have better support for Linux operating systems. | ||
Jose_X on May 14, 2008 6:13pm ZaReason seems to have a good (open) warranty (check it out) and decent prices for hardware that will work with Linux http://www.zareason.com/shop/home.php
| ||
Richard Steven Hack on May 14, 2008 6:54pm One thing people should keep in mind is reliability. How often, once Linux is successfully installed with drivers, does Linux need to be tweaked compared to Windows. I don't know about some people but my clients have continuing problems with Windows. That's why they have IT people and consultants to solve them. And when Windows goes down from either its own failings or the failings of a third party software, you need JUST as much smarts to fix it as you do on Linux. In fact, more so, because on Linux, while you may have to hunt for the documentation for some obscure setting somewhere, once you find it, it's probably a text file that needs simple editing. On Windows, first you have to hunt for the obscure error message, then you have to hunt for the problem solution - and then you have to either reload software, or find some obscure utility that repairs the problem. The latter is a major problem. Microsoft buries a lot of its functionality in the system which is not available through a GUI. This is especially true on Windows servers. Once you discover the solution to the problem, guess what? You have to download some obscure command line utility with bizarre and inconsistent syntax to access and repair the Windows issue. Believe me, your grandma is not going to do that either. She's going to call Geek Squad and pay them $100 an hour to fix it. So how is that better than Linux? Linux has one simple problem - driver support. Once corporations decide that making Bill Gates the richest guy in the world is not an effective use of their capital, they will start deploying Linux in the server room. Once they've seen Linux reliability there, they will realize that having the same APIs and protocols on the desktop will be beneficial. Then they will demand their desktop OEMs provide Linux. And their OEMs will demand certified drivers from their suppliers - as Dell is already doing. And that will be the end of the Linux driver problem. Nothing will ever solve the "it's hard to fix problem" for ANY OS until the software industry gets its act together and starts producing quality software that works together properly. Don't hold your breath.
| ||
jhansonxi on May 14, 2008 9:03pm Open source advocates and the Linux fanboys would say that it does,
Some do. Most are just patiently waiting for the day when they can see "Windows" as a historical footnote - nothing more than a popular fork of OS/2. And what would these fanboys say to those who want to play the latest
Solutions: <a href="http://www.wine-doors.org">Wine-Doors</a> <a href="http://www.playonlinux.com/en">PlayOnLinux</a> | ||
Post a Comment