Linux Ubuntu Vs Windows Vista Discussion on which OS is better, Vista or Ubuntu.

[Spyda 0]

Is this a trick question?Windows Vista is better for many reasons. I mean even though windows vista had it's compatibility issues it could still play more games then Linux O.S.'s have ever been able to. If Linux Distributers started supporting and working with game company's to make the games compatible with there o.s. I would consider using Ubuntu and the like more.But Windows Vista has so many more ups than Ubuntu.

[rvalkass 5]

Windows Vista is better for many reasons. I mean even though windows vista had it's compatibility issues it could still play more games then Linux O.S.'s have ever been able to. If Linux Distributers started supporting and working with game company's to make the games compatible with there o.s. I would consider using Ubuntu and the like more.

The problem is not with the Linux distributions, but with the game manufacturers. The vast majority flatly refuse to write games for Linux, despite the fact there are a few games writers that make their games work. Some are even now making their games specifically not work under WINE for absolutely no good reason. They also refuse to release their code to Linux developers outside their own company because they don't want to reveal their code. There are examples of games, such as Warzone2100, that show it is not hard to make a game run on Linux.

But Windows Vista has so many more ups than Ubuntu.

You only listed one, relevant only to gamers. What are these "many more ups"?

And the frequent crashing, compatibility issues, terrible/non-customizable UI, poor design, viruses, slow boot times, and the constant presence of microsoft should make you come right back around to linux.

Could not have put it better myself

[jlhaslip 4]

Well, my version of Ubuntu 8.04 or 8.10 has only failed me when I do something I should not do, like use sudo to modify stuff I *think* I understood, but the effect is to whack some config settings someplace. Have had to remove or reset some configuration files a couple of times then re-install from the Universe or Multiverse, but that is far less work than a full Operating System re-install. As a whole, I have far fewer difficulties with Linux than I ever did with Windows. Don't miss the Blue Screens at all, and no anti-Virus protection required to slow the box down ... I am sold on Linux, for sure. Looking forward to the April 9.04 release soon.

[truefusion 3]

Looking forward to the April 9.04 release soon.

I won't even wait for it to be released in April, i'ma switch immediately after Alpha 6 comes out, which will be in about 6 days from today. Looking at the Jaunty packages in the libraries section, i can already see Qt 4.5. This will be quite helpful in expanding my programs.
Also, i hear they've increased performance again for Ubuntu concerning 9.04. When 8.10 was out, i was amazed by its performance, so i'm wondering what to expect from 9.04. Perhaps i could do some more tweaking to what it is being done to it already to increase performance, at least boot times, even further. I saw a YouTube video once showing Ubuntu boot up in about 10 secondsthat is, the system and the GNOME environment (they had enabled the auto-login feature for GDM). I was a bit skeptical concerning the video, as to me it looked like they just added a fast-forward effect, but in the description the comp specs had a processor that was overclocked to 3.7ghtz, so that would explain the speed. I think they also had disabled USplash.

[aloKNsh 0]

as i think ubuntu is great for internet surfing and also for some cool new experiments and not to forget for hacking........but vista takes 1gb ram to run smoothly so i prefer ubuntu

[iGuest 3]

Hate Vista want LinuxLinux Ubuntu Vs Windows Vista

You people just talk that Vista is better because it plays more games than Linux but there are more important things to do with your computer other than playing games on it. I personally hate VISTA /txtmngr/images/smileys/smiley7.Gifit is so slow, stops working in the middle of my work, to run games it needs more ram and GHZ . VISTA IS MY WORST NIGHTMARE./txtmngr/images/smileys/smiley11.Gif Thats why I gonna install Linux on my laptop and run both Vista for games and Linux for everything else. /txtmngr/images/smileys/smiley2.Gif

-reply by Klaudynka

[iGuest 3]

Ubuntu is the best choice for me. I've been using Windows for as long as I know (3.11, 95, 98, XP, and Vista) and I still use XP at work, but recently I switched from Vista to Ubuntu 9.04 and I must admit it's the bes OS I've ever tried. Of course, after years of using Windows I was not familiar with a lot of Linux stuff, and after a couple of days reading posts it was really simply to solve. All I possibly need is in Ubuntu. I don't game, so I have nothing to miss from windows, instead I regret not giving a try to Ubuntu before. I simply hate Vista because since I started using it I have not been able to solve all the problems I've had with software I tried to install and couldn?t, or maybe could but not run, or programs crashing down, internet connections failing, etc, etc, etc. Ubuntu is not for people who want it easy, but it is not as difficult to use as they say, so give it a try, you won't regret it!

-reply by ernestoscar

[iGuest 3]

Please expand upon your topics. Dont say features, tell us what features!Linux Ubuntu Vs Windows Vista

"Yes Windows is better than any other OS and I bet, you might go toOther OS just for sake of testing it or having a feel of it, but whenIt will come to other features of OS and more things you would like toDo with your PC, you will come to know, Windows is the best. I haveInstalled Ubuntu quite a few times, looks soothe too, but easiness andExpandability of operations makes me come back to Windows."

are you talking about features such as interoperability? You know, like how you natively read ntfs partitions in *nix, but cannot read anything but FAT* and NTFS in windows? Is the restart in time a feature, makes sure people take typing breaks from their Vista computers. Please explain what features are available on Vista, and are not available on ubuntu shy of typing apt-get install feature-name. Lets say you want to upgrade your video driver in windows, while your kids are watching a Hannah Montana movie marathon on a shared drive: download, use the mouse all over the screen clicking next next next, pray windows file protection don't keep some files the driver is trying to update, restart the PC listen to little girls cry and finally cross your fingers as it boots up (see file protection step). On ubuntu open a terminal and type sudo -I, killall gdm && apt-get install xorg-drivers-ati, when that is done log out and then log back in (take important note the kids didnt even notice).

As for easiness of operation please do not inject your own view, ou are not in the right shoes to say it is Easy when you mean you are more familiar with it. If you give someone Ubuntu on their first computer and (how ever long you have been using windows products) years later offer that person Vista? Yes they would make similar complaints you have (why does it take me 5 minutes and 10 mouse clicks to change a networking option). Now for expandability, you really did not go there when attempting to compare windows to GNU/Linux, exactly how does one "Expand" the windows operating system? Do you mean go out and purchase the Vista Ultimate upgrade to enable desktop transparency (which *nix had working before XP days)?

Though I must admit in some areas *nix is lagging. Video games, video editors Open Office doesn't look as sexy as MS office 2k7. But the functionality is there and as more people work their way over the learning curve of *nix this line will be blurred more and more. 

In my opinion the areas that *nix outshines windows more than makes up for it. IE, I can boot up, log into a Cisco router, copy the config with minicom, swap out the router with a new one, write the config to the new router and shut down the laptop before I would even be at the login screen if I had booted my lappy into XP. And this applies to all my IT work. I have yet to have *nix fail on me in all these years where the best solution is to reinstall the operating system. Even when installing *nix you have a completely usable computer, have you ever browsed the internet, checked you e-mail or watched a movie on the computer while windows was being installed?

-reply by LameBMX

[iGuest 3]

7 vs UbuntuLinux Ubuntu Vs Windows Vista

I am going to ignore Vista completely and go to 7.

 First,Though, I must say Vista does take quite a lot of RAM. While it hasGlitches in its own protection and limitation system: UAC, it does haveA very nice cashe service and because of this preforms many actions in a quicker pace.

 ForInstance, when you open a file in Vista, and it is heavily opened, itLooks to the cashe and opens it in literally half a second. But is thisEnough? No,Vista has improved drivers for writing to the hard drive andWhile it still takes a large portion of processing power, it stillTakes less power to run than Ubuntu because power solutions are a veryLarge part of the OS. Ubuntu, on the other hand, is made forstraightforward programming with little difficulty on the side of bugsAnd errors. In this way, they went straightforward in doing everythingAnd did not consider power consumption (it is a large group effort ofStreight-foward OS dependencies and programs after all).

 However,Let me move away from Ubuntu's simplicity and Vista's cashing. Windows7 not only has even more improved voice recognition, cashe, and otherThings alsong the line from Vista, but the OS its self has fewerProcesses and takes less space in the RAM. It has a sleep look likeVista, but even more customizable and sleeker (in my opinion [newTaskbar look and take on loading and such features]).

Windows 7 is also coming out with several applications that Ubuntu cannotMimic without paying its own large share of money to hire programmers. To start, the voice recognition software willProbably never be seen in a decently-close version on Ubuntu. It isJust another one of those things. Also, Windows is releasing driversThat can be used by system programs through the OS to access featuresSuch as multi-touch, something we are all looking forward to. We haveAlready experienced one such application, as I do not know the name,But it was a globe that could expand and spin by touch as a realisticOne does.

 Now, Ubuntu is backed by thousands of bug-fixers workingFor free, tons of people making open-source application, and an army ofDriver creators. Ubuntu come pre-installed with user-friendly apps thatCan help any user get to not only KNOW the OS, but use it withSimplicity. The simplicity part is not always straightforwardThough...As you may know. Ubuntu is also arguably built well aroundMulti-user preformance. With sudo, your advanced computer user can haveA generously safe computer with little hassle...Except for theComplications. Sometimes you don't want to just use the command lineFor everything, but few people care. Booting into sudo would ruin thisJust like booting into admin on Vista. People may not realise suchSecurity threats...So, in Ubuntu, it is in no way to the normal userEasy to do that, but probably for their own good...Since it's littleEffort to use the command line in most situations.

Ubuntu has some problems too...For instance, when youInstall a program, all the binaries are dumped to a file called bin.While this, I have found, is useful concerning Ubuntu, it may also haveProblems. When you install a program in windows, it doesn't install 50Binaries all into one folder. It has a Program Files folder forPrograms to dump their data into, executables and ALL. In ubuntu, theseThings, this data, is separated. A better organization is due, in myOpinion, for the binaries concerning applications.

On that mark,You can usually add any installed program to your GNOME menu throughThe menu editor. This almost always works, but I have used Ubuntu forOnly so much time, and I have installed about 100 programs. From these,About 4 have had this problem. I had to go look in the bin folder forThe executable to add it to the list.

 Finally, I will talkAbout both Ubuntu and 7 here. The file browsing experience on 7 is muchFaster, as has been said, but from what I see, is much simpler. TheBacklighted icons are nice, just like on 7, but Ubuntu is pretty roughIn the GUI on my opinion. As little information as it is, I thinkPeople can relate to what I am saying. However, I would have to sayDragging files around in 7 and vista is quite annoying. Most of theTime, it just makes a drag box...But I think when you click on theBackscreen only, it should do that. The only way to avoid this is toHold down the cursor for a second, which has probably wasted about 50Minutes of my life...Yeh, I drag lots of files around on the GUI!All in all, I find 7 to be the best with all of its program support andUsability. I think most people like Ubuntu because it's open source andThat only...However, I can think of many situations in which Ubuntu isUseful. Of course, Windows has something people around here may notKnow about, DRM, which slows it down exponentially and does nothingWhat-so-ever. If DRM leaves, Ubuntu has another thing coming...Still, 7Takes about the same amount of RAM as Ubuntu, nearly as much as XP, andIt is inevitable that they are both in the big leagues. You can't denyEither one of these great OSes. I suggest having a dual boot, since IHave run into many problems that just cant be solved in windows!

Good luck guys, choose both!

-reply by water

[aloKNsh 0]

soory to say but vista is no where near linux ubuntu coz vista requires a large no. of resources and ubuntu compared to it nothinand also you do not need to update it as frequently as ubuntu there are many.....

[onkarnath2001 0]

On XP and earlier Windows PCs, making Windows and Linux live together was almost automatic. Any of the major distributions made it easy. With Vista, things have changed. Microsoft has deep-sixed its old boot.ini bootloader in favor of a new bootloader.
The new bootloader, BCD (Boot Configuration Data), is designed to be firmware-independent. It also comes with a new boot option editing tool, BCDEdit.exe, which isn't so much user-friendly as user-hostile. I'm not, by the way, talking here as someone whose chief concern is dual-booting Linux. BCDEdit is a pain to work with no matter how you're modifying Vista's boot behavior. Unfortunately, though, you're going to have to work with Vista bootloader, because Vista doesn't deal well with being installed on a system that already has an operating system on it that you mean to keep.

In my case, I had already decided to blow away my system's existing Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005, Update Rollup 2 operating system. I could have "upgraded" this system to Vista, but I really do want to give Vista its best chance to shine

A few weeks ago, i downloaded a live-cd for Linux Ubuntu 8.4 and booted it from the cd. It was not as bad as i had thought (although i had trouble booting ) but REALY SLOW. So i installed Ubuntu and was pretty nice . From my experience from vista and ubuntu i have to say vista still stands number for me. Which one do you think is better?

hen you open a file in Vista, and it is heavily opened, it Looks to the cashe and opens it in literally half a second. But is this Enough? No,Vista has improved drivers for writing to the hard drive and While it still takes a large portion of processing power, it still Takes less power to run than Ubuntu because power solutions are a very Large part of the OS. Ubuntu, on the other hand, is made for straightforward programming with little difficulty on the side of bugs And errors. In this way, they went straightforward in doing everything And did not consider power consumption (it is a large group effort of Streight-foward OS dependencies
However, Let me move away from Ubuntu's simplicity and Vista's cashing. Windows 7 not only has even more improved voice recognition, cashe, and other Things alsong the line from Vista, but the OS its self has fewer Processes and takes less space in the RAM. It has a sleep look like Vista, but even more customizable and sleeker

Notice from rvalkass:

Copied content needs to be quoted.

[iGuest 3]

After my dad showed me Ubuntu I've always had a second PC with it. My dad would always find impossable ways to run windows apps of software on it although I could never figure it out.

I like ubuntu unlike windows vista if ubuntu has a problem or a bug you can just fix it. If vista has a problem...Your screwed.

[k_nitin_r 8]

Hi!@onkarnath2001If you are like most people, you probably have installed Windows and are getting Linux installed as your second operating system. The boot loader of Linux usually takes over, putting to rest your concerns over BCD, the Windows Vista/7 boot loader. It sometimes makes you wonder why Microsoft had to introduce a separate bootloader. Perhaps it was intended as a first step toward instant-on bootups, as some hardware is capable of with Windows 7. It may also have been a step toward getting Windows to run on Apple hardware, since a lot of Mac users have Windows running on their computers using BootCamp, which provides a usable Windows environment with complete support for the Apple hardware under Windows.@iGuestYou can generally run most common Windows applications on Linux using the Windows Emulator (Wine). This is different from virtualization because the use of virtualization incurs a heavy overhead and prevents you from getting the intended performance from the system/software.