Re: Why Ubuntu (Still) Sucks - Part 2: Compiz Fusion

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

Charlie Tame wrote:
Frank wrote:
Charlie Tame wrote:
Frank wrote:
http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisedesktop/archives/2007/10/why_ubuntu_stil_1.html



Actually there are a number of effects in Compiz Fusion that are extremely useful, while Aero really is purely eye candy.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Aero is an extremely functional feature of Vista.


And of course this is a personal opinion so we can only agree that we disagree.

Hold on Charlie, isn't everything about computers based on "personal opinion"?


When using
Vista I use it just like XP,...

what a waste...


Well I usually have 2 monitors, at present only one, but I simply find the cube (Which can have more than 4 sides if you want) provides a handy way to keep several things open. Vista, like XP is purely "Flat Screen" technology. That's not wrong, it is just something missing.

I currently use two 28" monitors, sitting bezel to bezel, using two different computers that are both triple booted. I use a KVM to switch between the two and will have 8-12 windows opened on both at any one time. I have a MS mouse with the center scroll wheel set to Aero by simply pressing down on the wheel which brings up Aero and the rolling the wheel forward or backward rolls windows in the same direction. Fact it, I can always see all of the opened windows simply by pressing the scroll wheel...I don't necessarily have to roll back and forth to see all of them.
Can you fit 12 windows on a cube in linux?

What's worse is that Vista requires recent high performance hardware yet Ubuntu can do this on much older machines. (Debian handles the graphics faster I think).

That is not a problem for me.

So please understand that I am NOT slamming Microsoft OR Vista, but simply questioning what MS needs to develop (And Linux too for that matter) in order to keep us all going forward.

I like some of the new features in Win 7.

I regularly use Vista 64 - for me it seems to have been very stable - and I think the media center is great,...

My wife LOVES WMC in Vista! It's her PVR. She has a dual tuner setup, uses a remote and I don't think she could now live without it!

but that is not going to sell it
to businesses who appear to be able to do everything they need to do with XP and existing hardware.

XP is history...just like 95, 98, 2k.

In one way XP is a far bigger threat to
Vista / Win 7 than either Linux or Apple.

Not really.

when using Linux (And Compiz does not just
work on Ubuntu by the way) the "Cube" provides a very quick way to switch tasks without losing track of where you are.

Then you've not really explored the capabilities of Aero.


Well I have somewhat and however you look at it it's a flat screen technology, albeit with ultimate you can have it animated :)

Can you see all 12 or more windows that are opened at one time using compiz without doing anything (flipping or scrolling)?


And of course personal preference comes into this, so you may not agree, but the writer of the article you quote from is obviously little more than a shill and clearly has no experience with Linux except for watching Youtube videos.

And you clearly have no real experience with Aero.


Well what can you do with it you cannot do with XP?


Once you use Vista for real work for even a short period of time and then go back to XP you soon miss all of the nice little features that you've come to really like and appreciate in Vista like file transfer information, search, Aero, where things are located, etc..
Also XP while initially fast soon bogs down when having the very same load (re: a lot of software installed) as Vista.
Vista simply has more horse power to keep it steady.

You probably should get out more and talk with people capable of actually USING both systems :)

That's funny, I was just going to suggest you do the same!... :-)


I have to agree on that one :)


Try to remember that for a small business a Microsoft system can be expensive, Linux can be much cheaper or free, depending on the owner's own abilities.

Actually the decision on which system to use should be based more on the owners "needs". If you have no need to interact with other businesses or your clients/consumers, then you may only need a linux system, otherwise being isolated and crippling yourself with a very narrowly used system would be penny wise and pound foolish.


And I would completely agree that user needs are the key, however Linux does not have a problem interacting in most cases, in fact many of the IT people I know think Vista has more trouble interacting due to UAC etc. Personally I think this is somewhat due to "Resistance to change" but it has to be said that a small company, faced with having to replace a lot of other hardware due to driver issues is kinda forced to consider all costs.

At work I've had Vista, XP and Linuxes all working perfectly well together, and yes, while you can do more or less "Anything" with Vista which is not true of some Linux without added difficulty it really is not a general rule any more. For example our present IT guy uses and Apple Laptop to administer dozens of XP machines and others running Linux.

If you are expecting someone to "Pay More" they expect
more, and Linux has become a very viable choice for business use. I certainly don't want to see Microsoft lose out here, quite the opposite, but any company that ignores viable competition is in danger of doing that. Visual effects and swapping the "Control Panel" icons around does not constitute a whole new operating system, especially when users then have to go out and replace 90% of their other hardware because drivers are late or never written.

Of course Linux is not suitable for every purpose, but in a terminal server environment the OS on the terminals does not really matter, so even when some "Windows Only" software is needed a company can save money by using Linux instead. They are also far less likely to have employees catching viruses, spyware and wandering about on the internet when they should be working.

Obviously the business world does not agree with your assessment to any large degree seeing as how linux has only about 0.47% of the desktop market.

I really don't take too much notice of statistics Frank, the reason being that most small business owners are not IT professionals themselves and therefore being "Used To" seeing MS products everywhere see it as "The computer". This is a lead that Microsoft got early on and previously there was little competition. Previously if you talked of computers most people thought of IBM.

What is this about?

http://www.thestreet.com/story/10478357/1/ibm-sun-talks-could-go-beyond-next-week.html?cm_ven=GOOGLEN


Okay, Sun have had their own proprietary OS for a long time, personally I don't much like it but it's way out of the "Toy" definition. It's not so far removed from Linux. Sun have taken a big bite into the "Office" market by investing in Open Office. Clearly IBM think they can make inroads into Microsoft's market or they wouldn't be interested. IBM Dos lost out to MS Dos, they won't want that to happen again will they?

MS have always taken a lot of heat for poor quality,...

Legacy is the real problem. As in how to maintain some semblance of backwards compatibility yet add useful features.

that happened for
the most part simply because MS are the biggest, but in the future with the IBM name and a PC operating system and a big advertising budget MS need to get quality and innovation at the top of their list.

Sure, it's just my opinion, but the titanic sure wasn't unsinkable and once damaged she went down real quick.

I just don't get that analogy at all.
MS has built a world wide 'standardization' that is very useful and familiar to almost all computer users. Maybe someone, someday can/will beat them at their own game, but radical change proly isn't in the cards.
Nice talking with you Charlie! :-)

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Why Ubuntu (Still) Sucks - Part 2: Compiz Fusion
    ... Aero is an extremely functional feature of Vista. ... Vista, like XP is purely "Flat Screen" technology. ... So please understand that I am NOT slamming Microsoft OR Vista, but simply questioning what MS needs to develop (And Linux too for that matter) in order to keep us all going forward. ... Clearly IBM think they can make inroads into Microsoft's market or they wouldn't be interested. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.vista.general)
  • Re: Vista is not a failure. The MS marketing team is...
    ... Microsoft's Marketing team is, not how Vista failed. ... Linux is the opposite of Modular when you look at what ... If you look at the OS X 10.5 release, Apple listed 300 features new from ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.vista.general)
  • Re: Windows vista, why???????
    ... include many of the features that makes OS X and linux more ... secure. ... Agree - I have yet to see a really worthwhile new feature in the Vista ...
    (uk.comp.homebuilt)
  • Re: Windows vista, why???????
    ... include many of the features that makes OS X and linux more ... secure. ... Agree - I have yet to see a really worthwhile new feature in the Vista ...
    (uk.comp.homebuilt)
  • Re: Article: - David Intersimone on DevCo, the viability of Delphi, and Turbo Ruby
    ... these technologies to push Vista. ... If MS thought that people would go out and buy Vista in droves just to get ... So MS has to push the new features into the current OSs or developers won't ... features that again put Linux another decade behind. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)