That depends on the distro. They can all be customized to your liking depending on how deep you want to get into the OS. but some come out of the box with a ready to run configuration as soon as the install is done, others I would liken to a Hot rod car kit that you have to have some knowledge and ability to configure from the ground up. If Opperating systems where cars, Windows would be a minivan, Get the family from A to be even grandma can handle it, but it don't really get much real important work don on it. Mac would be a VW Beatle, it's cute, fun to look at but still limits you to what you can fit in the trunk. Linux would be Ferari's next generation concept car, Cutting edge, perpetualy experimental, yet it's build by people who know what the hell they are doing!
If Linux is a bicycle, we can put some training wheels on it while you are learning to ride. It's called live CD. Download, burn, boot and explore with no risk of breaking anything, but all the reward of learning to use an OS that gives it's users all it's power. Here's the coolest part, if you don't understand how to do something, Google it. just like you do when you don't understand how to do something in windows. Gone are the days of flipping through giant tech manuals written by people with degrees in computer engineering. You can come to forums just like this one for down to earth solutions that make sense. Once you have your head around it, we'll take the training wheels off and get you on a high speed carbon fibre racing bike and you can show everyone still riding the windows big wheels how it's done in the world of big boy computing.
My question is why would I want to have to configure an OS when one exists pre configured for me. I have other things to do when I am on my computer. The OS is like a car. It gets me to where I'm going but I don't want to have to work on it to get it to go. You can tout the virtues of Linux all you want but I doubt you'll get many converts here, but good luck with that.
maybe a bicycle was a bit extreme but if linux is a ferrari it's still only a dream parked in your garage waiting for someone to make compatible wheels and gearshift and other peripherals to make it actually work I have actually tried to use linux many times over the years and i have always had to walk to away because it just won't produce what i need, only two days ago i tried an install of Ubuntu 9.10 and at the point I couldnt find any linux compatible drivers for my canon S750 printer and Lide 600f scanner I had to give it up as without those devices I'm dead in the water on shutdown my speakers produced a loud "bump" not nice and potentially damage to the sub my mouse drivers where very basic and my extra buttons aren't enabled, this means i cannot move forwards and backwards in a browser window as I prefer and mouse gestures in opera do not work. I went to download incredimail ( my email client of choice for years) and it's not available in linux and flash player is required which doesnt seem to be available for opera, without incredimail and flash in opera i am dead in the water. my software environment requires flash for website design and working with dynamic databases editing msyql scripts for joomla installs , working with images and I just don't like the gimp ubuntu seems nice and works well feels stable but has nowhere near the capabilities and compatibility that i need to make it viable. solve these and a few more issues and you might have something that can compete with windows and mac !
no no no... how did everyone get so confused... A COMPUTER is like a bicycle to assist the human mind's efficiency. The operating system is like the road.. it can be a smooth paved surface like windows.... easy for the mainstream public to travel on... or it can be rough terrain like Linux that needs a mountain bike for the rough and rugged to ride over.
I tout the virtues of Linux not simply to get converts. My goal is to get people to make the leap to at least try it. if I can get just one out of a hundred people who read my opinion, yes it is just my opinion, to make that leap to attempt it. then perhaps just 1 in one hundred of those actually participated in the open source process if even on a very limited level, it benefits the Linux community. Without people saying "hey, I have this issue, and without it, I can't do with Linux what I need to do," Progress doesn't happen as fast as it could. There is tremendous potential and benefit of moving to open source computing. For all it's "usability issues" look how far it's come in the last 15 years. The first time I installed a Linux distro it was like trying to understand calculus without first understanding basic arithmetic. Now it's to a point where you can pop in a distro and have most of the grunt work of getting a usable GUI done for you. Linux is always going to be a work in progress, My suggestion to is that everyone should set up a partition and get a dual boot up and running and tinker with it. When you find a limitation, jump on the forums and look for solutions. Tell the manufacturer of your third party devices that you want Linux support. When Microsoft gets a request for a solution, their first priority is to make sure that the solution that is viable in no way costs them money or market share. If it does either, you can forget it. In the Linux world, it's not about money it's about progress. There are no accountants in the Linux world ready to crush a project because it isn't profitable. Yes universities, private and government organizations do incredibly powerful things with Linux that the average user isn't going to be able to accomplish because they don't have teams of people writing highly specialized applications for very narrow and limited needs, but without hearing what your needs are, the Linux community has no place to start. It's like playing chess in the dark. This should speak volumes.
I don't understand what difference it makes if anyone tries it or switches to it or from it. I don't care one little bit. Reverend Cleophus James: in the Blues Brothers movie said When I woke up this mornin', I heard a distubin' sound. What I heard... was the jingle- janglin'... of a thousand lost souls! ... switching to Linux
Windows 7 is worth every penny, dime, nickel, quarter, dollar bill, five dollar bill, ten dollar bill, twenty dollar bill, fifty dollar bill, and benjamins on this planet.
Without people like ickymay who has at least given Linux a go, the Linux community would have a much harder time finding direction with respect to improvement. He may have given some effort to communicate his misgivings to the Linux community. He also may not have, but the more people at least attempt to use it, the odds go up that some will participate in the open source precess. When solutions do arrive to some of ickymay's issues with Linux, perhaps then it will be a viable system for him. I'me quite sure that he would appreciate an OS that can do exactly what he needs and not cost him anything. Participation in the open source community doesn't mean that you have to be a super nerd ready to rewrite Kernel 3.0. It can be as simple as having a partition that you tinker with as a hobby. Showing up on a forum and posting the limitations that you come across. At some point the people with the skills and resources will develop solutions to accommodate your needs and the whole system benefits. As it stands with Microsoft, if there is a limitation, the development team has to prioritize it's projects according to what the bean counters tell them. that means only the projects that they determine as the most profitable get addressed. and as I said earlier, If an improvement or resolution costs them profitability they aren't going to implement it. I would be incredibly happy to pay Microsoft for a commercial Direct X compatibility layer designed to give me the ability to play some of may favorite games on Linux, But they wont do it, because it's more profitable to force me to buy their bloated and broken Operating systems.
I agree it's a very good OS.. and I'm not a shareholder.. I think Microsoft is the biggest pirate ever... I fear the power Microsoft has because they have the potential to turn off nearly 90% of all computer simply by saying.. you're not validated.. sorry no soup for you! Actually their method of turning computer on and off through activation provides a delicious target for anyone wanting to design a bug to criple a civilization. Even the governements of all the most powerful nations in the world can't turn off our computers. I'm hanging on to my DOS applications.. just in case. You may have to pay me $40 for a 4 k disk manager... haha. Still.. Window 7 is worth at least $50.
Well, you dont absolutely have to upgrade... but theres no fun in having old technology.... unless its an old classic car. lol LOL - My first lover was ugly but I upgraded when i married...
Of all the fantastic wonderful solutions I have posted.... this one is the only one I'll be rememberd for.
This thread reminds me of a wealth guy who had an expensive yacht for sale. A potential buyer was looking at and liked it and asked the wealthy man "how much." The wealthy man replied... "If you have to ask that question you can't afford it."
It isnt bad with the discount code I have for being a student. Its only $30 but I did get it for free 3 weeks ago for having a windows 7 party.
I read in a forum that someone said he had already bought 17 keys using this method... with the same edu address and same credit card. Apparently they don't care or he is using a loophole that allows several students who live at the same address to all purchase the $30 deal. I think Microsoft wants young minds to be hooked on their products so badly that they would give them Win 7 but it would cause too much suspicion it they didn't charge something. I wonder how much Microsoft makes from advertisers by directing people through their multitude of avenues to their websites? Why else would Windows practically get on their knees and beg you to use their defaults, Bing, and the shopping sites "recommended" from IE ? That's probably where the big money is coming from.
Drew is right,, this thread got over blown from the original question to a great degree,,, however, I feel that some of the comparisons made on alternatives is valid to the original question... But would like to add,,,,,,, The price for Windows Software can be looked at fairly simply. 1. If you purchase retail,, you are paying for a full license to run on any (single) system you wish for as long as you wish, and is transferable to any other system, forever. .......................OEM does not carry that weight 2. Retail pricing for average users constitutes the making up of funds lost on all the special deals (promo's, students, piracy, OEM, basic support, continued development on SP and hotfixes, etc.) 3. MS are a software only company (98% atleast), they don't make near the money off hardware that they do off software So if you don't fall into one of the above number 2 categorize and you do end up having to pay full price for retail, that is where your money is going to, plus the added benefits of any single system at a time license. It's simple economics. Business needs to make money, period. Regardless of profit. If you don't take in more than you spend on running the company you go out of business. That's why gov't can't make welfare type programs pay off in any way. They are not in the business of making money,, only taking what they can get. So, MS may be a gagillion dollar business, people made them that way. We, the public consumer. Want to make a comany go away? Stop buying their products. It is that simple.
