Alternative to Windows

c0rneL

I have ubuntu and my children are using it a lot. They grew up using ubuntu, they do their homework, they go online, they use the variety of educational software available free.

I believe that is a very cheap way of allowing children to have a computer.
ubuntu needs less hardware resources than windows, so the PC are running faster(you can install ubuntu simultaneously on the same PC -- and you can choose each time what Operating system to start-- either Windows or Ubuntu).

Both my children have windows/ubuntu on their laptops -- they use a lot more Ubuntu, because they have a lot more programs available and it is faster.

I suppose, if you have a lot of money to buy some latest hardware, and lots of money to buy educational software for windows-- then Windows is a good option; But for someone who want to save some money -- installing ubuntu on kid's PC is a good option.

There is another consideration, kids safety and virus attacks -- far more secure on ubuntu (without having to subscribe to antivirus software)

Either way do not forget there are a lot of free software for windows, (i.e. you can use open office, without having to pay £80-£100 for Microsoft office)

candtalan

SatanicHare wrote: »

Is it more secure because it's harder to create viruses/trojans that run on linux, or is it because the people who create these exploits are looking for maximum impact and believe that linux has such a small market share and it's users are more tech savvy and less easily caught out

Each factor you mention has an effect, except the first. It is easy to *create* malware either in Windows or in GNU/Linux, however it is very hard to propogate it around GNU/Linux users, while experience shows it is easy to do this with Windows. Much of the internet is run on Linux servers, and they are mercilessly targetted, and some do get hacked, usually through them still using old software versions.

A Ubuntu system is typical in requiring you to use a password before installing system level programs, this means you *know* when something is being installed. If you choose to install from untrusted sources, that is up to you, but people tend not to, there is plenty of good stuff. The Open Source nature of the software used is also important in allowing open inspection of any and all code. It is hard for mischief.

There are, say, 20,000 apps etc available in trustworthy libraries (repositories) which are tended by teams. People who write this stuff also use it themselves, so the whole community is interested in a good safe experience.

The Linux filesystems have sophisticated systems of privilidges which add to the inhospitable environment for malware.

Annual shootouts between Windows, MAC and (Ubuntu) machines have so far shown ubuntu (GNU/Linux) is harder to hack. But it is not impossible.

Users of Linux: IBM (who also sell it), Google, Amazon, Facebook, Yahoo, French Assembly, Gendarmerie (70,000 PCs), and many more.

The Government (Cabinet office) is very keen for greater use. Search on
'Open Source, Open Standards and ReUse: Government Action Plan'
The Opposition also have a similar policy.

Eric_Pisch

many people here already use it

I have it on a couple of machines, however i find it very limited and can not do all the things i want to do, if your just after basic office / web stuff then it does the job very well.

bonzer

Eric_Pisch wrote: »

I have it on a couple of machines, however i find it very limited and can not do all the things i want to do

What did you find you can't do? Maybe we can help.

gaming_guy

I used to use ubuntu 8.10 (which worked perfectly), then i did a clean install of 9.10 and that's when the problems started for me:

• Half the options have either been removed or are hard to find
• My sound card no longer works properly (so am having to use the onboard sound)
• The system beep sound when caps lock/numlock etc are pressed no longer sounds even though i have manually removed the pc speaker module from the blacklist
• some of the the useful commands don't work after a clean install unless you manually enable them (ie. ctrl + alt + backspace to restart gnome/x11)

That isn't a full list by the way

If 10.04 doesn't improve on any of the issues i'm having with 9.10, then it's bye bye Ubuntu and hello Debian (or fedora) for me

buglawton

This thread seems to prove to me that MS has the de facto monopoly with runner up being Mac operating systems. This is because they are standard. We are all waiting for just one more standard OS to appear which achieve genuine economy of scale, where a problem fixed or feature added is for everyone using that alternative and updates are automatic and 100% reliable in not breaking existing functions.

Google is threatening to bring out a PC operating system - interesting. Ideally Google will take an open source Linux variant by the scruff of the neck, enhance and support it as one single major alternative to Windows.

I'm watching this space:
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-os.html
...what is a little disappointing so far is the mention that it's going to be a lightweight OS... so the chance of drivers appearing for every piece of hardware look a bit slim. But you never know, it's our best hope yet.

Richie-from-the-Boro

buglawton,

I too, but for different reasons. Since Redmond pulled the ' cloud based ' funding from WinVista I'm concerned that stand alone PC's will all be driven to Google's cloud based O/S via Chrome.

That's why Chrome is to be a lightweight OS, and that's why they eventually will be able to charge by the hour

You've already bought and paid for the puter, but your apps, docs, etc will be ' cloud based ' all the processing power needed will also be cloud based, it's easy then to charge money for giving you access to your own stuff.

Example : the on-live idea where you play megga games on line from an £80 rubbish palmtop from Maplins, all the processing power is done on the on-live site, but

- you need an expensive megga internet connection
- the cheap hand held from Maplins
- and an expensive hourly rate for an on-live subscription

candtalan

gaming_guy wrote: »

I used to use ubuntu 8.10 (which worked perfectly), then i did a clean install of 9.10 and that's when the problems started for me

The 6 monthly releases are close to cutting edge each time, and I find they are usually ok on my machines. It is advisable to simply use the Live CD facilty to check if your hardware is suported before committing to that version. However, you may know that Ubuntu has so called 'Long Term Relase' versions (LTS) which are supported for three years, and have the longer term aim of stability. You can also do a version upgrade from one LTS to the next, for example from 8.04.4 straight to 10.04 in April this year.

You can do version upgrades online. In your case this would have meant 8.10 to 9.04, then to 9.10. Although not a 'clean' install, it is more likey that solutions to your particular hardware would have been sucessfully carried forward maybe.

Marty_J

candtalan wrote: »

I use Ubuntu, not Windows. Ubuntu is one of the (most popular) versions of GNU/Linux, similar extraction as MACs, only Open Source, not Proprietary like MACS. Proprietary means 'secret code' and often expensive too.

Just to point out the Mac OS X contains many open source technologies. It might seem surprising to some, but Apple are quite a big player in the open source world.

(and just to be anal, it's "Mac"; "MAC" means something else entirely)

You can buy CDs, or download free. You can pay for annual phone support, or use free support. If you want to try it, it is easy depending on how techie you are, or if you have a friend who can. The thing people find hard to believe at first is that there is no catch with GNU/Linux. It really is free.

I think there are quite a few catches with Linux, ease of use and software availability being the biggest. Now, someone may find Linux very easy to use, and perhaps it has all the software they want, but these things should be considered before jumping ship.

Annual shootouts between Windows, MAC and (Ubuntu) machines have so far shown ubuntu (GNU/Linux) is harder to hack. But it is not impossible.

Those contents don't tell you as much as you'd think.

gaming_guy

candtalan wrote: »

The 6 monthly releases are close to cutting edge each time, and I find they are usually ok on my machines. It is advisable to simply use the Live CD facilty to check if your hardware is suported before committing to that version. However, you may know that Ubuntu has so called 'Long Term Relase' versions (LTS) which are supported for three years, and have the longer term aim of stability. You can also do a version upgrade from one LTS to the next, for example from 8.04.4 straight to 10.04 in April this year.

You can do version upgrades online. In your case this would have meant 8.10 to 9.04, then to 9.10. Although not a 'clean' install, it is more likey that solutions to your particular hardware would have been sucessfully carried forward maybe.

Thanks for that

The sound card never worked in 9.04 when i tested a Live cd out, so i think the hardware drivers may have been dropped from the kernel now.

I tend to stay away from upgrade installations as i find they can cause other problems later on.

I'm on a slow internet connection, so i tend to grab the alternate CD to save a bit of bandwidth or use the netboot CD and leave it running overnight.

PS. the hard drive with 8.10 installed failed, so i couldn't upgrade it and thought a clean install of 9.10 would do the job.