Best Operating system to load onto a new PC

DatabaseError

23n1th wrote: »

Glad that you tried them. However like 99% of PC's bought today you had no choice as to whether Windows was preinstalled or not. Theres no choice there.

I have to disagree. I currently have 5 PCs in my house, and the only one that came with an OS was the Toshiba laptop (provided by the insurance company after my old one fell down a flight of stairs many years ago). All the other PCs were built by myself, so I got full control over both hardware and software.
Linux would undoubtedly have been much, much cheaper, but the MS systems have taken very, very little supporting. It seems a little education, and a couple of simple apps and they are fast, reliable and secure. Plus there is nothing I've seen on another OS that I miss, I don't need to look for "alternatives" to industry standard software, I don't need to run another OS, either as a VM or a physical partition in order to access software I need.
I really like the idea of a "free" OS, but the reality is, for many of us, MS provide the OS that matches our needs, nobody else does.

I will agree that for those with simple needs, the "do e-mails, download photos from your digital camera and use Office" people linux can be a viable alternative, so long as they are prepared to accept they will be manipulating those files on something similar to most other people, not the same, and accept that this may create small, but not insurmountable, problems.

kabayiri

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Installed Linux as I said earlier. No command prompt. Mrs Shadow uses it and only uses a command prompt when I suggest she pings something which is exactly what we would do in windows. As for the tasks you suggest, well of course, you can't use Office on Linux, because Microsoft don't want it on Linux. Open Office does the same job and Linux does the rest of the tasks fine. I think your experience is way out of date.

I have run MS Office under Linux since at least 2006, using CrossOver (Wine basically). It hasn't caused me any problems.

I'm surprised we still see comments about Linux and command lines, ie slagging off from an ignorant viewpoint. Windows has come on a lot with Windows 7. But then so has Linux. It's coming down to personal preference more and more. The phenomenal success of Macs has proven that there is life outside the windows world.

esuhl

Yeah - I have 6 PCs in the house at the moment and only 2 came with an OS pre-installed. One laptop with XP Home (which I've now replaced with XP Pro to get round the buggy user-level permissions in Home) and my netbook, which had a buggy distribution of Linux, which I replaced with Arch.

I have XP running on PCs that other non-techy family members will use, as it is familiar and easy to use. I also have XP on my print server and media centre PC simply because I wanted them to be easy to set up and maintain. Installing the OS, setting up network shares, installing anti-malware applications and writing a script to automatically update the anti-malware apps was a lot quicker & easier than tinkering with Linux, given my experience.

I mainly use Arch Linux on my netbook (because XP was way too slow) and on my desktop (because I enjoy learning about Linux, get better performance and I like it's customisability). I still use XP for backups, Win 7 for the odd game.

Whether a Linux or Windows OS is "best" depends on what you want it for and your own preference and interests.

Millionaire

23n1th wrote: »

Then you're not a typical consumer. Typical consumers don't build computers and don't get a choice, they get windows by default and unlike web browsers wont hear of anything else.

Typical Consumers even if they had a choice would pick Windows.

esuhl

23n1th wrote: »

Then you're not a typical consumer.

DatabaseError never claimed to be; you made that assumption.

Toxteth_OGrady

Millionaire wrote: »

Typical Consumers even if they had a choice would pick Windows.

Agreed but things can and do change as users slowly become familiar with alternatives.

10 years ago IE had > 90% market share, it's now < 50%.

Linux has the dominant share of the server market but that's maintained by IT specialists.

I'm not on the 'one is better than the other' bandwagon. Windows and Linux are different but the difference in GUI/useability and ease of installation/use of applications is rapidly converging. Consumer versions of Linux (Ubuntu, Mint, PCLinuxOS) are winning over converts because they are becoming a lot closer to Windows in look and feel, so all credit to MS for setting the benchmark. There are however many aspects of the improvements in the Windows experience from W98 to W7 that have come directly from the Linux world.

I use both equally depending what tasks I need.

:cool:

TOG

ian2211

Mr_Thrifty wrote: »

All these techies that recommend linux seem to forget that most people want to use their computer without having to spend days on end in a command prompt just so they can get the thing to boot.

Nor do most people want to use emulators or spend ages with complex configuration settings just so they can run basic software like MS Office. As for OpenOffice and the like... well, frankly it's like going back in time 15 years and using Office 95. Except that Office 95 was probably better.

Sure, if you're a database programmer and spend half your time in a command prompt anyway, or if you gain intense enjoyment from spending hours in front of command prompts, Linux might be for you. Similarly if you enjoy making ordinary, everyday things complex. Or if you like using software that is about 10 years behind the equivalent Windows version. Or if you want to become familiar with one system at home and then finding yourself using another system at work. And despite what the techies say, Linux is not more stable than windows. The only reason it seems more stable is because most Linux users rarely do more than fiddle around in the control panel or tinker about with operating system settings.

But if you want to browse the web, do e-mails, download photos from your digital camera and use Office, then frankly right now there's not much of an alternative to Windows (I'm sure Mac users will again argue otherwise, but that's a whole different line of reasoning... in many ways the diametric opposite of the Linux school of thought).

Not used linux then I presume. A standard install of Linux is less hassle than Windows. All hardware is recognised and drivers installed, no hours of updates after installation either. Installing software is a doddle and plenty of support on the web as well.
It is narrow minded views like this that prevent linux from becoming more wide spread.
You might want to try a Mac, linux or BSD and see what a proper stable virus free "just works" operating system is like

dg1dd1ngs_2

I installed Mint 10 on a friends old pc a few days ago. It took about 15 minutes to install. The networking aspect of it was pain free. It found the relevant drivers etc and it worked straight away. It found a driver for his GeForce9500 and sorted it in minutes. He is now dual booting Windows XP and Mint 10 and is loving it. (I have successfully converted another person to Linux!)
My girlfriend still isn't convinved yet but I am working on her!

Sublime_2

I hope the OPs made his decision!

Toxteth_OGrady

What was the original question again? :rotfl: