Linux versus Win7

[mikeymouse]

My daughter sent me windows 7 premium I know in this forum windows is not a favourite subject.
I installed it today on my laptop and it installed well no difficulties were found.
The only thing it does better than Linux is dialup.. I have to have dialup as there is no highspeed anything here.
Win7 was on my laptop for a few hours and i had to say goodbye to it as it just didn't fill and void i have.
I have been running Linux and presently have Ubuntu 8.04, Ubuntu 10.04, Linux Mint 8 and Ultimate Edition Ubuntu 2.4..installed on my computers.
It seemed to me windows 7 was old, hard to find programs and configurations...
If win7 is the best that Microsoft can come out with at this time I think they are on the downward slope..
I wish to thank all for the work they have done on Linux Mint, it seems to make the other distributions a little peaked..
Now i can just sit here and wait for the new Linux Mint and be thankful for all Linux.
thanks all
mikeymouse

[Aging Technogeek]

Most of us here have nothing against Windows, we just prefer Mint and Linux in general. Many forum members have Windows partitions on their computers, me, for instance.

Glad to see you enjoy Mint so much. Wait 'til you get Mint 9.

[Biker]

If win7 is the best that Microsoft can come out with at this time I think they are on the downward slope..

Windows 7 is an excellent release. While it may not be for you, it is an excellent product. Going from Vista to Win 7 on this notebook reduced the overhead by almost 50%. An OS is a tool, and as with all tools, there are some things that are better suited for that particular tool set.

[FedoraRefugee]

Windows 7 does a great job here, I am totally satisfied.

Linux is fun, it is my hobby. I enjoy tinkering with it. But...When the day comes to kick the last kid out of the house, sell everything and buy an RV and a couple hogs, and hit the road...It will most likely be Windows on my laptop.

[vtired]

I use linux 100% on my computers, no dual booting. Not because I am gainst windows but just feel more comfortable with linux. But in two occassions I have refused to install linux for people who requested it on their netbooks. The simple reason being that they might have to use USB 3g modems on those netbooks. With Linux you cannot tell when these modesm will work or which ones. In that case, for people who expect everything to work always out of the box, windows is better option and microsft did good to come up with windows 7.

[JonM33]

I personally think Windows 7 is the best OS that Microsoft has ever released. It is leaps and bounds better than Mac OS X and is a toss up with Linux. I find myself enjoying both Linux Mint 9 and Windows 7. I can't get enough of either. What keeps me on Windows 7 is purely the gaming. Linux cannot compete, even with Wine. I guess I could become a console gamer instead but the current consoles (Xbox 360, PS3) use technology that is several generations old. 3D graphics are so much better on the PC and FPS (first-person shooter) games in general are better on the PC.

[idlekids]

I had only tried Windows 7 for a few days before installing Linux Mint as a dual boot option. I was/am happy with it but I did have one problem; all games would just start up and return a black screen. I found that changing the compatibility fixed it but it makes me feel that there are a few creases in Win 7 that still needs ironing out. Otherwise, it's a nice OS.

[thenewguy]

I use linux 100% on my computers, no dual booting. Not because I am gainst windows but just feel more comfortable with linux. But in two occassions I have refused to install linux for people who requested it on their netbooks. The simple reason being that they might have to use USB 3g modems on those netbooks. With Linux you cannot tell when these modesm will work or which ones. In that case, for people who expect everything to work always out of the box, windows is better option and microsft did good to come up with windows 7.

I tend to agree with this. Win7 is a pretty good OS. there are some things I don't like about it, but then no OS is perfect. In the case of people using netbooks with 3g modem,s why not test drive Linux on their machines with a live CD? If the CD picks up the modem, then they are home free. I've found some modems which wouldn't work properly with Windows, but worked okay on my Linux machine (and modems which were the opposite).

[Pierre]

I use linux 100% on my computers, no dual booting. Not because I am against windows,
but just feel more comfortable with linux.

I just triple boot my three linux O/Ss.

one of them, though, has the latest offering of CrossOver from CodeWeavers, installed onto it.
this is the best implantation of Wine, yet. The next version, due soon will include Wine 1.2.

[deleted]

@FedoraRefugee
Linux is my hobby, it is my work. I develop Java/Flex/Flash applications on a daily basis. I was "forced" into *nix and 64-bit since most folks (testers included) tested on *nix and 64 bit last. That is, all they knew was Windows. This made it hard (not due to complexity) to fix problems close to the ship date because the problems had to be addressed since my company supports those platforms. Developing on it finds things like long* verses int*, \ verses /, cross-domain authentications, mixed case, etc. The result was using it at work influenced my hobby decision. I got a cheap, generic PC for home since I intended to run Linux.
True, there are some hiccups, but by the time I get an RV, I think that all the suspend/wireless features will ironed out

BTW.. I "cut my teeth" as a Win 3.0 developer. I used ULTRIX in college, but I started with Borland C++ 2.0 and OWL, so Windows was my first love. Like mentioned earlier, an OS is a tool. Choose the right tool for the right job. I tell my kids they can drive a nail with a wrench, but it's a lot easier to use a hammer.

-Hinto

[JonM33]

I had only tried Windows 7 for a few days before installing Linux Mint as a dual boot option. I was/am happy with it but I did have one problem; all games would just start up and return a black screen. I found that changing the compatibility fixed it but it makes me feel that there are a few creases in Win 7 that still needs ironing out. Otherwise, it's a nice OS.

Must be some very old games. Microsoft actually did a great job with Compatibility Mode - first used in Windows XP. That's why the install takes up so much space. They kept the legacy DLL files around for older application compatibility.

[libssd]

My netbook came with XP pre-installed, and last year I sat in on a teleconference just before Win 7 was released. My impression was that it was still about 1 release behind Mac OS, and about on a par with the release of Ubuntu (9.04) that I was using at that time. Nothing has happened since then to change my opinion, and I didn't/don't feel it's worth the money/effort for me to upgrade XP to Win 7.

There are things that Win 7 can do (and do better) than Mint/Ubuntu and vice versa. Mint/Ubuntu does everything I need, so the only time my netbook gets started in XP is about once a month to spend 2 hours downloading and applying the latest security patches. Although it's far better than earlier versions, Win 7 is still insecure by design.

Use whatever tool meets your needs.

[deleted]

There are things that Win 7 can do (and do better) than Mint/Ubuntu and vice versa.

This is why I run Linux Mint as a host and Windows 7 in a VM. Of course this will depend on your hardware, but I find that Win7 runs fine as a guest with only giving 2 gigs of ram to it. (on a quad-core/8 gig ram desktop)
-Hinto

[JonM33]

My netbook came with XP pre-installed, and last year I sat in on a teleconference just before Win 7 was released. My impression was that it was still about 1 release behind Mac OS, and about on a par with the release of Ubuntu (9.04) that I was using at that time. Nothing has happened since then to change my opinion, and I didn't/don't feel it's worth the money/effort for me to upgrade XP to Win 7.

My impression on Mac OS X from using it was that it was designed for children, seriously.

[Superewza]

My netbook came with XP pre-installed, and last year I sat in on a teleconference just before Win 7 was released. My impression was that it was still about 1 release behind Mac OS, and about on a par with the release of Ubuntu (9.04) that I was using at that time. Nothing has happened since then to change my opinion, and I didn't/don't feel it's worth the money/effort for me to upgrade XP to Win 7.

My impression on Mac OS X from using it was that it was designed for children, seriously.

And quite badly designed, not only is it so much harder to do simple tasks (like say... open a program, or switch between them - what's up with Finder anyway? How hard can it be to make a decent file browser?) but i found it surprisingly unstable. I could live with it, but when it crashed and lost several days worth of photo editing work that was the last straw as far as i was concerned.

But yeah, that it doesn't let you do anything other than the most simple of tasks without jumping through an irritating number of hoops does tend to imply that it's aimed at children. But then... why not use Meego? Or even Mint? Apple have been leeching of Open Source innovations for years, rebadging them, calling them their own and selling them for extortionate prices. In fact, i'd say they were a worse corporation than Windows.

[BubbaBlues]

I don't have a problem with Windows, Microsoft or even Bill Gates. They employ a lot of people. Good for the economy. What I do have
a problem with is registry errors, spyware, trojans, viruses and browser hijackers, all of which I've had my share of. And I don't like waiting another 30 seconds for the antivirus to finish loading after Windows finishes booting, before I can use it. Not to mention all of the resources the anti-virus and anti-spyware programs hog up. It's a great OS, but it's just too much trouble.

[JonM33]

I don't have a problem with Windows, Microsoft or even Bill Gates. They employ a lot of people. Good for the economy. What I do have
a problem with is registry errors, spyware, trojans, viruses and browser hijackers, all of which I've had my share of. And I don't like waiting another 30 seconds for the antivirus to finish loading after Windows finishes booting, before I can use it. Not to mention all of the resources the anti-virus and anti-spyware programs hog up. It's a great OS, but it's just too much trouble.

My desktop has 4GB RAM. The 80MB that Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE) uses in the background is negligible to me. Heck, I even run a Windows XP SP3 VM in VirtualBox (for testing) set with 512MB RAM. It has MSE installed as well and isn't one bit slow. Of course if I intended upon doing heavy internet browsing with it I would bump it to 1024MB instead.

[BubbaBlues]

If you're using Microsoft Security Essentials you may as well not even have an antivirus. Be careful where you surf.

[JonM33]

If you're using Microsoft Security Essentials you may as well not even have an antivirus. Be careful where you surf.

Why? It has been rated one of the best AV programs available and it's free.

http://www.downloadsquad.com/2009/10/31 ... ssentials/

FYI, Microsoft didn't really make it. They have acquired several security software companies over the past few years. THOSE companies are the ones that made Security Essentials.

[randomizer]

I like MSE. It's lightweight compared to the others, it doesn't have ads (I'm looking at YOU AVG!) and it doesn't bug me except when the virus database gets old. I used AVG forever until I installed MSE. But AVG since v8 has become a monster.