OK guys, i want replecing Windows XP Pro to Ubuntu did Ubuntu good or bad ? did can still play Windows games on ubuntu ? What good points and bad points that system have ?
#1
- NoFear1989
Ubuntu its good or bad ?
Have you ever used Linux before? Cause it's not the same as Windows, and you probably won't be able to run many games on it (if any), though I've seen people around here who were able to run LFS on Ubuntu using Wine (with so-so results, not everything would work properly).
for your experience level, its bad
For you knowledge level:
Go buy a Mac, so then you can't fill them with viruses and spyware.
Ubuntu is quite good distro for people who are fresh to Linux and want to learn some basics (filesystem tree, packaging system, console etc.). It usually doesnt require much attention in terms of configuration and tweaking as 95% of things work just out of the box. So if you are interested in Linux and want to see if it is useful for you, then it is definitely a good choice.
But it is no substitute for Windows if you are seriously thinking about using a lot of windows-based appliactions - particulary games. Tough you might have heard about tools like WINE, Cedega and CrossOver which allow you to run windows apps under Linux, it is not like that you just get one of those and start gaming/whatever under Linux. There tools can barely be called really useful, they are pretty glitchy and you WILL run into some problems sooner or later.
Linux is safe, 99% virus and spyware free, pretty stable and with proper software much easier on system resources that windoze. It is also very customizable. I have been using it every day last time and I am very satisfied with it. But installing Linux just to run windows apps under it is a wrong way of thikning and you should really consider getting back to windows or at least dual-booting if this is what is on your mind...
But it is no substitute for Windows if you are seriously thinking about using a lot of windows-based appliactions - particulary games. Tough you might have heard about tools like WINE, Cedega and CrossOver which allow you to run windows apps under Linux, it is not like that you just get one of those and start gaming/whatever under Linux. There tools can barely be called really useful, they are pretty glitchy and you WILL run into some problems sooner or later.
Linux is safe, 99% virus and spyware free, pretty stable and with proper software much easier on system resources that windoze. It is also very customizable. I have been using it every day last time and I am very satisfied with it. But installing Linux just to run windows apps under it is a wrong way of thikning and you should really consider getting back to windows or at least dual-booting if this is what is on your mind...
How do you know his experience or knowledge level?
I've been running XP Pro since it was first released (NT before that), and while I have been happy enough with the stability of those OS's I have always played with the idea of changing to a Linux based OS. Have tried on a few occasions over the years but always found it too hard and reverted back to what I know.
About a month ago my XP install appeared to have been hacked, so I decided "stuff it I'll give Ubuntu 9.04 a serious go" I chucked in a new hard drive and proceded to do a fresh install.
It wasn't entirely without incident but went more smoothly than I expected, I am very happy with Ubuntu for my daily tasks (i.e. spreadsheets, email, wordprocessing, database, internet, etc) and was suprised how quickly I was able to adapt to the new environment. I haven't tried to run LFS or other games though and don't intend too, will be getting a second PC shortly for LFS.
Things I did and didn't do.
Did - search for possible problems that linux might have with my hardware (i.e. typed in my m/b chipset and linux as key words to a search to see what experiences others had had)
Didn't - plan or organise for the change in a smooth manner. I just bit the bullet and went with it, something I wouldn't normally recommend. I did it almost as a test to see if Ubuntu has improved over early versions.
The only issue I had was with the install - it took me about four failed attempts before I figured out that Ubuntu had a problem with my graphics card, once I worked out how to install with safe drivers it all went like a dream.
I think Ubuntu is a stable, fast and easy to use OS has extensive amount of quality software available and best of all it's free.
I've been running XP Pro since it was first released (NT before that), and while I have been happy enough with the stability of those OS's I have always played with the idea of changing to a Linux based OS. Have tried on a few occasions over the years but always found it too hard and reverted back to what I know.
About a month ago my XP install appeared to have been hacked, so I decided "stuff it I'll give Ubuntu 9.04 a serious go" I chucked in a new hard drive and proceded to do a fresh install.
It wasn't entirely without incident but went more smoothly than I expected, I am very happy with Ubuntu for my daily tasks (i.e. spreadsheets, email, wordprocessing, database, internet, etc) and was suprised how quickly I was able to adapt to the new environment. I haven't tried to run LFS or other games though and don't intend too, will be getting a second PC shortly for LFS.
Things I did and didn't do.
Did - search for possible problems that linux might have with my hardware (i.e. typed in my m/b chipset and linux as key words to a search to see what experiences others had had)
Didn't - plan or organise for the change in a smooth manner. I just bit the bullet and went with it, something I wouldn't normally recommend. I did it almost as a test to see if Ubuntu has improved over early versions.
The only issue I had was with the install - it took me about four failed attempts before I figured out that Ubuntu had a problem with my graphics card, once I worked out how to install with safe drivers it all went like a dream.
I think Ubuntu is a stable, fast and easy to use OS has extensive amount of quality software available and best of all it's free.
I think it's pretty clear from the way he asked his question that he's never used Linux before. The question he asked is the most basic question of all, so if he asked it he's clearly a beginner when it comes to Linux.
Everybody's a beginner at some point when it comes to Linux. Why should that stop him trying it to see if he likes it?
To the OP: I say go for it and it you happen to not like it, stick your XP disk back in and get Windows going again.
To the OP: I say go for it and it you happen to not like it, stick your XP disk back in and get Windows going again.
..............
==========================================
@ OP: If you haven't used Linux before, like many others have said, it can be a bit daunting at first... Ubuntu happens to be one of the more user-friendly versions where most things can be done thru the GUI/Desktop rather then the command line. Linux is very powerful and once you figure out the "inner workings" and how to use the command line you will soon see that its not really all that much at all.
Most "flavours" of Linux will run quite a few Windows games thru 3rd party addons, namely Wine and Cedega. But be aware it WILL NOT RUN EVERYTHING -- So if you see a nice shiny box for Crysis on a store's shelf and have hopes to play that on Linux, not gonna happen.
Looking at it from a non-gaming perspective -- OpenOffice runs on Linux (and comes with Ubuntu if i'm not mistaken..) which is completely interoperable with Microsoft Office (Opens & Saves to/from MS Office file formats), Firefox works fine, VMWare & Sun VirtualBox run fine (im sure you'd have no need to run something like this... but meh)... and theres a whole whackload of stuff im not even going to bother putting down here... but im sure you can see where im going with this.
So.... If you enjoy a bit of challenge and want to have a stable and secure system, I'd reccomend going with Ubuntu (FYI, Kubuntu i find works better for beginners... it's desktop operates similar to Windows so there is minimal [if any] learning curve in that respect). LFS runs OK under Linux (with some very minor issues, like poor shadows..) -- For a full list of applications tested to work on Linux while using WINE, please visit http://appdb.winehq.org/
Let us know what you choose and dont be afraid to ask any questions
Everyone is all like "Ubuntu is user friendly! its linux that's easy to use!"
I've worked with Linux and various other Unix systems before and the first time (and last) I installed Ubuntu on my computer was an absolute nightmare. Compared to SUSE it was like a walk in the park vs. a NASA launch.
To get any of my programs to work I had to spend a day and a half downloading dependencies. On top of that it took the thing more than a day to install and finnish updating.
In the end I had downloaded a fue gigabytes of files and still didn't have everything working properly.
I haven't used anything but Windows for a long time now, so it could be different, but still. If you want to go linux, go the real deal. It might cost money, but at least it will work out of the box. If you have no experiance with linux you should probably stick with XP, gaming on linux can be tricky if not impossible for some games.
I've worked with Linux and various other Unix systems before and the first time (and last) I installed Ubuntu on my computer was an absolute nightmare. Compared to SUSE it was like a walk in the park vs. a NASA launch.
To get any of my programs to work I had to spend a day and a half downloading dependencies. On top of that it took the thing more than a day to install and finnish updating.
In the end I had downloaded a fue gigabytes of files and still didn't have everything working properly.
I haven't used anything but Windows for a long time now, so it could be different, but still. If you want to go linux, go the real deal. It might cost money, but at least it will work out of the box. If you have no experiance with linux you should probably stick with XP, gaming on linux can be tricky if not impossible for some games.
It could be different? If you don't know, then why post a completely uninformed opinion?
-- it most certainly is quite different since what you are describing sounds a lot like RedHat 5 thru 9. Albeit around the time 9 came out package managers were becoming more and more the norm and were beginning to be included in the distros base install package... The package manager is a program/utility that you use to install a program.... their names differ depending on what flavour of linux you use but it's usually either apt, yum or yast2 . It searches the various mirrors on the net for the fastest one near you, looks for the file you want to install, the looks for what that file needs in order to install and run, then grabs it all for you and installs it in one shot. It's as easy as typing:-- yum install apache (on a redhat distro)
-- apt-get install firefox (on a debian distro)
-- yast2 -i apache2 (on a suse/opensuse distro)
and *poof* ... off it goes, searches for the file, then its dependencies and gets them all and installs. It's even all available thru a pretty GUI now. Heck you dont even have to tell it if you have a 32bit or 64bit OS, it will figure ALL that out for you. If only Windows was just as easy!
I really do pity the "Windows generation" sometimes.... If only you guys grew up with real computers.... not computers with pretty little "skins" ontop of the real OS... heck i remember when something like this was like seeing windows vista for the first time and going WOW
Big ol' dual 5.25" floppy drives, one disk (360KB in size) containing the OS and another disk containing your files... no hard drives.... 640KB of ram, 128K video memory.... 1200bps modem or a 2400bps if u were rich (imagine downloading something at 0.15KB/s or 0.29KB/s ... ROFL )
Oh and if you were a real power user, you could upgrade to 1MB of RAM.... if you had a spare line of credit.
I stand by my prior statement.
Go buy a Mac, they are the bestest at everything.
Go buy a Mac, they are the bestest at everything.
Yeah pay 1300 bucks for a completely non-upgradeable boat anchor with the same internal specs as a $399 budget system from BestBuy. Only a retard would do that.
The only thing that is worth any money in those one-piece hunks of junk they try and pawn off as some miracle of computing would be the LCD screen in the 24" iMacs...
here's a hilarious quote from their website:
I seriously hope thats a friggin typo! Yeah.... buy Mac... they're the bestest at RIPPING YOU OFF! Hence why I said anyone who buys one or falls for their stupid marketing is nothing short of retarded. FFS you can install OSX onto x86 hardware with Intel 965P chipsets anyways, so why even bother buying a Mac anymore?
Because you can simply put your own RAM in instead of paying that price.
But then again, you have a nice white box, that does everything better than a shit PC, so why pay 300$ for a shitbox, when you could pay 1300 for a box of bliss.
But I'll excuse you for this this time Teedot, Just please next time do some research before spouting off. Nobody likes a fanboy.
But then again, you have a nice white box, that does everything better than a shit PC, so why pay 300$ for a shitbox, when you could pay 1300 for a box of bliss.
But I'll excuse you for this this time Teedot, Just please next time do some research before spouting off. Nobody likes a fanboy.
Mine $500 PC can run GTA IV with 40-60 fps. Now let me guess, $1300 for Mac + $100 for Vista = $1400, thats almost 3 times more. And in terms of performance mine PC would still win.
And yeah, iFanboy
Does it really? tell me, does it run these games better then on PC: HL, HL2, Crysis, Armadillo Run, Bridge IT...? u get my point, saying that a MAC does EVERYTHING better then a PC is just bullshit! the mac has its strengths and weaknesses just like a pc, so believe me, its not better at EVERYTHING...
EDIT: More games! Burnout Paradise, Fear, Fear 2, Dead Space, Crazy Machines 2, DiRT, GRiD... L-I-V-E F-O-R S-P-E-E-D ?-?-?
Macs can't run even CS2D, not talking about Source games
i know, i have a mac myself. sure they are good at graphicapplications, but they suck hardtime at games :P
Sure thing... That's why my Mac can run all those games that you listed just fine.
PC's however chug at the first sight of those games, but Mac's have the latest in GPU and CPU technology so they never slow down ever!
Steve Jobs = GOD
You guys should really stop evangelizing PC's. Nobody likes fanboys, especially when they try to push their own (shit) choices on everyone, especially those that prefer things that are good.
PC's however chug at the first sight of those games, but Mac's have the latest in GPU and CPU technology so they never slow down ever!
Steve Jobs = GOD
You guys should really stop evangelizing PC's. Nobody likes fanboys, especially when they try to push their own (shit) choices on everyone, especially those that prefer things that are good.
im as far away from a "fanboy" that i can get, but u are one.
HL/HL2 has NEVER been able to run on a MAC.. not natively, and thats what im talking about here.. not through bootcamp or any other crap. i have never said that PC's are better then MAC, just that MAC sucks when it comes to games!
steve jobs = god? thats bull, sure he can alot of the stuff he does, but why should a mac cost 3x the amount of a pc with the same specs?
and tell me WHEN u have been able to play those games i listed WITHOUT a emulator.. will not happen..
fanboy? no, as i have both u moron!
how come i dont even get framedrop when playing those games at 1280x1024, with everything medium?
hl / hl2 i can max out, as can everyone else with a comp < 3 years old.
latest in cpu tech? yeah ofc they have, they abandoned MOTOROLA and came over to INTEL..
GPU? yeah, same thing as i have in my PC, so there aint a diff anywhere..
YOU should read alittle bit more about PC's i think.
if only it worked like that
usually the journey begins with hunting down some obscure user maintaned repo that has any packages that are of actual interest
followed by finding some text file thats placed at a seemingly random location (which isnt consistent across distros either) to add that repo
followed by finding out you need other user repos to resolve the 100 dependencies which all depend on another 100 depencies each
i spent a considerable amount of time finetuning autoexecs and config syses to make certain games run either at all or better... and that was user friendly compared to my experiences with linux
and dont even mention the great newbie friendly ubunto which starts out with keyboard snapping frustrations until you get your nvidia drivers installed only to be greeted by the infamous 640*480 bug ubuntu had which can only be resolved by manually editing the xorg conf from a console since any gui editor is unuseable at that resolution
last time i checked Windows came before Linux... so how the hell can u pity the ones that uses the older software? Idiotic statement...
He's more talking about the fact that a generation of people have grown up using Windows...and this has effectively blinded them to alternatives (at least I think he is)
Please don't turn this into the bloody retarded Linux-V- Vvindows noob bitch fest. I think what teedot meant to say was that the "Windows generation" misses out on a lot of the interesting features and inner workings of an OS and hardware usually restricted whilst in a Windows environment, but all those things are for geeks and the masses only "want stuff to work", go figure...
For LFS, Ubuntu(and just about any Linux OS)is terrible to run high-end games and software unless you own a high-end machine capable of running resource hungry emulators.
So Ubuntu and Linux sucks a great of ball's for gaming unless you want to start typing code like back 1887.
1
2
Ubuntu its good or bad ?
(34 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG