digg

Join DiggAbout

Digg Townhall now online!
Check out the latest Digg Townhall, where Kevin and Jay answered the top questions from the Digg Community!

Upgrade price wars: Vista vs. Linux

desktoplinux.com — "The question you face on March 1, 2007 is, with a minimal budget for an upgrade, what do you do? Do you put on Vista or a Linux that comes with business support like SLED (SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop) 10."

show profanity settings
expand all
  • i440, on 10/12/2007, -39/+11Yes yes, Linux is less expensive then Windows. We know. But a computer with OS X on it is much more expensive then a computer with Windows on it, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't buy one.

    "and Vista lacking almost every significant feature it was supposed to include,"

    Ouch.
    • pkulak, on 10/12/2007, -33/+6I think my MacBook is pretty cheap by comparison. Maybe not a steal, but definitely not overpriced.
    • rickbauls, on 10/12/2007, -2/+22Yea, Vista is missing a lot. Most prominent being the absense of WinFS.
    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4LOL, this article is a giant strawman. There is no March 1 meltdown and there won't be one. That's almost like saying "If the Earth was invaded by aliens on March 1... " (they're already here)

      Enterprises that have been polled say they don't plan to upgrade to anything any time soon, XP continues to chug along like an old dump truck and serve their needs at the bare minimum. That is enough for most enterprises, they want predictability, they know how to fix XP's problems by now without retraining their staff or hiring new IT staff.

      Why pick such an arbitrary date? Vista will not be widely adopted until at least 2008. March 1, 2007 doesn't really mean anything. This article is another thinly-disguised "Is Linux ready for the desktop?" article. I think everyone gets it by now?
    • llbbl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It depends on what type of applications that I want to run. By 2007 this would be my optimal setup:

      Gaming: OSX
      Business: Linux (Ubuntu or SUSE or Fedora)
      Server: Linux (SUSE or Fedora)

      I haven't had much luck in linux with games (using Cedega), although other people have. By 2007 I won't be playing as much games on the PC anyways because the Wii will be out!
    • Nodren, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4this cracks me up, i use linux exclusively at work(only needing wine for windows firefox, to see flash 9 content, which is work related). and i can tell you right now, i wouldnt even dream of recommending linux to another employee in my office to use for work or home! I think its great, but i'm also knowledgeable about linux(moreso now that i'm using it alot) and with the ease of use windows xp provides and the fact i still have to help others fix the problems they have with it, linux would be an absolute nightmare.

      i'm not saying vista is great, but xp has been around for a while and has remained stable, theres no reason to change that unless vista really offers something more compelling then direct x 10 and aero glass.
  • Yaki, on 10/12/2007, -15/+65What is the point of this story? We get it, Linux is cheaper than Windows, stop rubbing it in peoples' faces.
    • Veamon, on 10/12/2007, -26/+13yea, but replacing your hardware for a hack system isn't as cheap.
    • yourstrulydave, on 10/12/2007, -22/+14My Windows is free.

      /I prefer to be called a Buccaneer-American.
    • Brahma, on 10/12/2007, -22/+15Screw both Vista and Linux. I am staying with my XP Pro for some more time.
    • rasterbator, on 10/12/2007, -9/+19I think the point is: Microsoft is getting it in both ends.

      Apple Macintosh and OS X growing in popularity, so if you want Vista which will most likely require the purchase of new hardware anyway, why not Apple? THe OS is superior and you can open all of your Office files in NeoOffice or OpenOffice.

      On the other hand, if you want to stay with your existing hardware, why not choose SLED or another Linux flavor, and run OpenOffice for office compatible documents?

      Either way, it is a win-win for users and a lose-lose for Microsoft.
    • Kittyflipping, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10I don't see the point in this story either. We all know linux is free and so is NOT upgrading to Vista (which is realistic, unlike the apocalyptic windows virus that is impossible to recover from), and even with a support contract it can be cheaper than windows. The fact is most companies that use Windows have lots of reasons that Linux just won't work for them, including; compatibility with the software they need to use on a daily basis, support for customers on Windows, and the fact that all of their users and their IT staff already know how to use Windows.

      I'm not pro-windows, I'm just saying it's a much bigger investment than a dollar value, and this article seems to think that all most companies do is use Outlook and Word. If that were true then this article would have some merit.
    • DrBob, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8You must bear in mind that Apple products cost a heck of a lot more than your average PC or Windows license put together, and that might deter people.
    • satansbanjo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Microsoft may be losing the OS market share for home users, but Windows is going to be the standard OS for business for a very long time yet, and that's the fact until the majority of home users switch to Linux, which will take a LONG time. Mac OS X is, in terms of business, not going to happen. I'm a Mac user, and love it, but Windows is actually very good over a business network where everything is regulated, and MS Office is a good package
  • ePlus, on 10/12/2007, -32/+4Good article! Dugg.
    • apocalizer, on 10/12/2007, -19/+6Useless, non-contributive comment! Not Dugg.

      (If you're like me you're gonna digg this down.)
  • Muyoso, on 10/12/2007, -8/+25Why is the question that we face on March 1, 2007, WITH A MINIMAL BUDGET for an upgrade, what do we do? If you think that you will magically see millions of people switching to linux because windows isnt cheap, you do not have that large of a brain. 99% of people who buy the OS, have it preloaded on their computers. DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUH.
    • InsomniaSlim, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Amen. Every version of Windows has been "expensive." Yet we're approaching the 8th iteration of a Microsoft operating system.

      People need to stop looking at the "quality" of the operating system being sold as the primary argument for which to buy. Microsoft has the clout (not necessarily earned, mind you) and the brute-force savvy to keep it's market share. Bottom line.

      Fact is, most casual computer users don't care. It boils down to what comes with the machine and will the cheap peripherals they buy at Best Buy work?
    • MikeCerm, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1This article is riddled with inaccuracies and incorrect assumptions too numerous to mention. First of all, remove the cost of the hardware, because most people are planning on buying a new system eventually anyway, and because you can run Vista on all the same old hardware you already have. Will Linux run better on the same hardware? What kind of hardware do you need to run Photoshop on Linux?

      Linux does have it's benefits, but this article is nothing more that Vista FUD.
  • InsomniaSlim, on 10/12/2007, -7/+29This article was terribly biased. I'm pretty agnostic when it comes to operating systems; each has it's strengths and weaknesses. I'd have preferred a side by side comparison with a minor recommendation.

    This boiled down to a tirade pretending to be a comparison. Boring.
    • Cmain, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13I agree with you 100%. While reading this article I couldn't help feel that the write was extremely biased.
    • MatttK, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4This is the best part...

      "So, the first question is: can your boxes run SLED 10? The answer, since I do it every day on a no-name box with exactly those components, is yes, you sure can.

      Can you run Vista? Well... that's another question, isn't it?

      Based on what I've seen of the Release Candidate 1 of Vista, the answer is no. SLED, on the other hand, does just fine with this hardware."

      Repeating the same point doesn't count as two points against Vista. Lol. The article really comes off as trying to shove Linux down your throat.
    • elnerdo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19Agnostic?

      You don't know whether or not operating systems exist?
    • apocalizer, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5Considering the article comes from desktoplinux.com I'm not surprised that it's biased. The example situation itself is biased toward Linux.

      Vista is a hell of a lot easier to deal with than Linux, and that's not going to change in the near future, and won't change ever until they make a version of Linux that'll run Windows PROGRAMS, not just open Windows Files. That's the truth on the mainstream desktop end of it anyway. Emulators don't count, it's too much hassle.
    • InsomniaSlim, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@elnerdo

      I agree, in retrospect, I probably could have used a better word... it's what popped in my head as I typed. :-) But from the definition:

      1. a. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
      1. b. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.
      2. One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something.

      ... I've always used the second meaning when I use the term.
    • Ademan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@apocalizer

      It's pretty clear you have no clue what you're talking about. "and that's not going to change in the near future, and won't change ever until they make a version of Linux that'll run Windows PROGRAMS, not just open Windows Files."

      Thats interesting because WINE (for most UNIX systems) does exactly that, run windows PROGRAMS. And it doesn't take anything but knowledge of a file format to open it. What's this business of "just open WIndows Files"?

      Quit being ignorant and then people will take your "arguements" seriously.
    • vandread, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@apocalizer

      You can run most windows applications in Linux just fine using the Wine API's. And Wine Is Not an Emulator. Its API's written for linux that allow the Win32 API's to be called and supports windows application headers. Most versions of linux come with Wine as an installable package and runing a program in wine is relatively simply, just "wine program"
    • apocalizer, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1I'm going to say it again: EMULATORS DON'T COUNT! I count Wine AS an emulator just because it pretty much does the same thing emulators do.

      It's too much of a damned hassle to have to install programs to *maybe* run Photoshop on your Linux box at reduced speed and with a bunch of weird bugs. The same goes for most programs, it's waaay too complicated for the average, or even for the competent, user, to install Wine, and then look for the program file, and run it, and all the other configurating crap you have to do.
    • Ademan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If you're counting WINE as an emulator, then you DEFINITELY don't know what you're talking about. WINE is a compatibility layer, in the same way that the GNOME libraries are compatibility layers for GNOME applications. An emulator INTERPRETS machine code on a software level, WINE does NOT do that. Get your terms straight, and learn what you're talking about.
    • EvilPenguin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3http://www.winehq.com/site/docs/wine-faq/index#IS-WINE-AN-EMULATOR
    • MSwanberg, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Ummm, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't WINE require that Windows be installed? Otherwise, where will you get the DLLs and such? So, that would erase the cost benefit.

      I agree with apocalizer that it's not just the OS. An office's PROGRAMS must run too. Sure, there are some alternatives... but they're not 100% usable. Ever try to run a VBA macro in OpenOffice?

      And personally, if my office changed every PC over to Linux, it would cost us millions to re-license all of the software that runs our daily business. And that is assuming that those programs exist for the Linux platform (or an acceptable alternative). Then there's all the regression testing. And to be perfectly realistic, we would have to have total redundancy of our hardware as we convert just to ensure that each piece works as it did in Windows. That may possibly be mitigated with packages such as VMware, but Lord, the efforts that would go into the conversion...!!!

      Of course, those efforts aren't zero with a conversion to Vista, but I would wager they would be far less.

      In the end, I think the OS makes up for only 5% of what users do. The remaining 95% is in the apps they use.
    • Ademan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3No, VMware requires a windows installation, WINE requires no such thing, thats the ENTIRE POINT of WINE, is to re-implement all of those windows DLLs (And of course, load the windows executable format (PE)).

      As far as PROGRAMS, thats the point of WINE, allow you to run windows PROGRAMS. WINE is very good at running most windows programs, most of the times you'll see WINE not working are with dx9 generation games, other than that WINE does a VERY good job of running windows programs. http://winehq.com has a list of apps that people have tried with wine, and it documents the amount of success with each. There are even reports of some programs being FASTER with WINE (note: things in the platinum, gold and silver lists are NOT all of the apps possible, hit browse to see all apps that have been tried)

      WINE is far from perfect, but it does a good job for a lot of common programs, and will even suprise you on some obscure programs. And not only that, WINE improves constantly, it's open source after all, each new release gets better and better.
    • EvilPenguin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3MSwanberg - Actually, you don't need Windows to install wine. From the homepage -

      "Think of Wine as a compatibility layer for running Windows programs. Wine does not require Microsoft Windows, as it is a completely free alternative implementation of the Windows API consisting of 100% non-Microsoft code, however Wine can optionally use native Windows DLLs if they are available. "
      - http://www.winehq.com/

      Also see:
      http://www.winehq.com/site/myths#need_win

    • benplaut, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1take it all with a grain of salt... this is posted on desktoplinux.com, after all...
  • sporkman, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9hmmm. I can go to best buy, and buy a 200 dollar emachines, or I can build the same computer for 500 dollars. the emachines may suck, but it comes with windows on it, the one I built myself I have to get my own OS... I think that buying a pre-built with windows is cheaper.
    • Dayz, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3emachines doesnt suck. I bought one and its doing really good
  • brendanc, on 10/12/2007, -7/+12Well for most people... the answer to "what to do on March 1 2007" is, quite simply... "nothing".

    Vista is the next version of the OS. Great. It adds more features, blah blah, and yes I'll use it. Most computer enthusiasts will use it too. But if you think for one second that corporate America and all the grandmas and grandpas of the world are going to rush out to buy Vista (or for that matter, any other OS), you are dead wrong.

    The problem is that XP isn't a bad OS. Sure, computer enthusiasts like myself are sort of fed up with it. Linux junkies have continuously campaigned against "M$" et al. But the simple fact is that Vista isn't enough of an improvement or change to warrant everyone (or even most people) to go out and upgrade.
    • monergism, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7True but all the OEMs will begin shipping the new OS. When someone upgrades, Vista will be the standard.
    • InsomniaSlim, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Absolutely. And don't forget: Vista will be familiar. Linux scares some people, including my parents-- They spent $100 on Video Professor to learn how to use Windows, and view everything but OSX an "advanced," daunting environment.

      "Point, click, double-click... where's my Internet?" That's all.
    • apocalizer, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Scares SOME people? Most people don't want to resort to scripts and ***** just to get their dialup modem to work. I know, I've tried, and the fix cost as much as a new modem.
    • eqisow, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3@ InsomniaSlim

      No offense to your parents, but people like that simply shouldn't be using computers at all. They are the reason botnets even exist.

      At the very least, they should be using Linux with Gnome.
    • bigtrouble77, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Vista could be the greatest os ever made as far as performance/stability/eyecandy goes... But if it imposes things like trusted computing and drm many of us will refuse to use it. Many people do not want to loose control of their data and get stuck depending on proprietary formats.

      Vista is gonna be chock full of that crap. At this point I want nothing to do with it. I'll re-evaluate windows when the source is opened.
    • mystagogue, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@egisow

      what kind of ridiculous, elitist comment is that? everyone has a right to use computers. and those of us who are truly passionate about technology believe in bringing technology to everyone, including InsomniaSlim's parents, and not keeping it away from those whom people like you deem as not worthy.
    • doodlebumm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@brendanc

      "Most computer enthusiasts will use it too."

      More like "most computer users." Computer "enthusiasts" know more than the typical user, and a far greater percentage of the "enthusiasts" will be likely to run something other than Windows. Most people that use computers just use what is installed. They don't have a clue that there are really other options. Damn sheep!.....
  • kolop1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9 Yeah I like Linux and have a dual boot system. Until Linux can play all of my PC games, there really is no issue. Windows (even though I dual boot) comes first.
  • bacon_skoda, on 10/12/2007, -2/+25with a minimal budget, you DON'T UPGRADE!!!
    • Nougat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Apart from the OS costs, you're going to spend a whole lot more money migrating from a Microsoft platform to a Linux platform than upgrading Microsoft products to a newer version. What? There's a cost that goes along with upgrading or migrating? Yeah - you have to pay people to execute it. You don't just buy OSes, then *poof* you're done. Then factor in retraining users for new OS and new apps (we're talking users here, the ones who can barely find the start button on WinXP). Also think about interoperability with other businesses - you'll have some sorting out to do there, too.

      Migrating from one system to another always has a higher soft cost. I have to think that migrating from Windows to Linux would have a huge soft cost, unless you're only using those machines to do web and email, and that the sticker price difference in the OSes would not offset that.
  • monergism, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19I laugh. I work in the SMB market and when recommending upgrades, the biggest concern is the use of existing applications.

    Let's use my Wednesday client for example.

    1. Some apps still run DOS or some 16-bit apps. Yes, this is a problem but it's worked (and will continue to work) on XP for the next >5 years.

    2. Some apps are only avaliable in Windows. These apps are required by the contracts that the client has with their client.

    3. This "Linux expert" they speak of is going to be remote and/or expensive. There are many SMB consultants that my clients can use but when it comes to *nix support, the selection isn't that great.

    4. I'm sure 98% of software will work with Vista. The article claims that "you'll also need to upgrade at least some of your software".

    Linux has a place but unless there is a decent support staff and a real reason to switch, most companies won't.
    • monergism, on 10/12/2007, -14/+8Diggers don't like facts or the fact that Linux doesn't work in the real world?
    • bacon_skoda, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6linux can work if you are starting from scratch. or with few computers and users.
    • crombenevolant, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8As a long time Linux user in the corporate world I gotta say that this argument is paper thin.....

      Even if you are starting from scratch or have few computers, the argument is still irrelevant. The main consideration your going to have will not be the cost of the OS or even which OS people like, but purely "What will run the software I need?"

      If the software you need for business is windows only based, or linux/unix based there is no decision.

      If by some miracle the software you need is available on both (or reasonable equivalants), then the question becomes one of how much maintenance and user training is involved. If you can save a $100 bucks a box but have to train every user on how to use a new OS/mail/browser/word processor/etc the lost productivity makes up for the difference.

      The final thing that is wrong with this is that most large companies (where economies of scale make the cost savings mean something) don't use free linux. They use enterprise versions of Linux that come with support and a higher level of testing (generally older kernels). Since those versions of linux cost every bit as much as windows the argument goes out the window.
  • Mudcrutch, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Why are these supposed companies upgrading anyway? What's wrong with them keeping XP? In the article it mentions that once Vista is loaded up with a few office apps, etc. it becomes quite sluggish. Well if all you are running is Office apps then there is no need to upgrade to Vista right away.
    • kolop1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7 You believe this "unbiased" article?
    • Jetfire, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I believe the biggest selling point for Corporate is you don't have to run Vista in Admin mode to get certain apps to run like you do XP.
  • 9tailfox, on 10/12/2007, -5/+23Vista vs. Linux - Mac vs Vista - Linux vs. Mac - BSD vs. Linux - Dick vs. Pussy

    Digg has become a fuking WWE cage match.

    LAME!! LAME!! LAME!!
    • JorgeGT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't know but I been told...
      /
      Eskimo pussy is mighty cold !
      /
      MMM, good...
      /
      Tastes good...
      /
      Feels Good !
  • skellener, on 10/12/2007, -15/+2I'll wait until I buy my new 24" iMac in the spring and get Leopard for free!
    • kolop1, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Yup over pay for the hardware...get a free OS.
  • wurzelgummage, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2What happens if SUSE get bought out by Microsoft, or just die, or something?

    I suspect there's a better chance of getting people to take care of your win2k boxes than SUSE in that scenario, a few years down the line.
  • Crab256, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6Linux is not even close to being a user friendly OS for the occasional computer user. For example, the installation asks questions about partitions. Do you really think that the everyday Word / Internet / Outlook computer user has any idea about partitions? Also, you’ll notice I mentioned MS Word and Outlook. Unless you’re willing to figure out Wine, good luck getting those to run on Linux for the average user. Open Office is still in it’s infancy to be considered an alternative to MS Office. While momentum is building for Linux, when March 1, 2007 arrives, people will either buy Vista or stick with XP until they get a new machine with Vista on it.
    • eqisow, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"For example, the installation asks questions about partitions."

      So does the Windows installer. Not to mention Ubuntu (and probably others) have automatic partitioners now.
    • ldog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@crab256

      Windows doesn't have to run on a partition?
      The same question gets asked when installing windows last time I checked.

      A non-technical user won't be doing an OS install, windows or linux.


    • bcmatteagles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4You my friend have clearly not touched linux in quite some time.

      1. Users don't setup computers - IT Staff do, so who cares about partitioning, not relevant to users in an SMB environment. And for that matter the Windows XP install requires partition setup as well.

      2. In a decent IT environment, the workstation will be relatively locked down. Novell has AutoYAST to help mass install workstations with a pre-built image, and Zenworks to help control what applications and updates get sent to machines on the network.

      It's really not that off the charts to think that big customers and possibly some SMB companies would prefer to pay a significant amount less on licensing if their users are able to be just as productive.

      I think the article shouldn't be looking at Vista vs. SLED but more appropriately look at paying existing high licensing costs versus SLED
  • hygraed, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6It's ***** like this that gets Linux its rep for being the favorite of immature teenagers. If people were to stop acting like middle-schoolers about this, Linux might actually gain enough credibility to topple something like Windows. But as long as this mindset persists, we Linux users will have to be content with being a niche market.
  • Dayz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3theres a March 2007 XP Meltdown?? First time i hear this
    • Edgardo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Of course this isn't real, XP will have support for many years to come, the author is playing with the idea of "You know, the virus attack that actually melted computers running XP", given this theoretical scenario, what would you do?
  • QuimZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I run both linux and Windows, I am starting to prefer linux more and more everyday, that being said, this article is pretty moot. The general population of users that you want switching to Linux don't have to, because their systems they buy from OEM manufacturers, come pre-loaded with Windows..The computer savvy niche' (us) doesn't need an article comparing the two. On another note, even in terms of Ubuntu, I wouldn't have someone like my mom using it..It's seriously, not near as friendly as windows is for her. If all she did was surf the net, and email, then yes, but she likes dabbling in a little of everything, and she doesn't want to play guessing games with installing software (can I use the install utility or can't I?), getting drivers to work right with her new hardware, etc.
  • Edgardo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2When I tried Vista beta 2 I decided not to upgrade my current PC, its too expensive and is not worth it. I will probably go back to Gentoo and buy a new notebook with Vista on it. Of course, this does not apply to the average consumer because I *must* have a working Windows machine due work (I do .NET consulting)

    This way I get the best of both worlds.
    • coredump0x01, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Check out Mono. http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page From the homepage: "Mono provides the necessary software to develop and run .NET client and server applications on Linux, Solaris, Mac OS X, Windows, and Unix." I've never used it because i've never messed with .NET, But people I talk to who use it say it's great.
    • Edgardo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@coredump0x01: yes I know about Mono, but you can't do Microsoft .NET consulting on a linux box, that's just lame. :)
  • GoneSouth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Articles like this really just serve to display how little linux technical folks know about the IT needs of small business. Let me help ;-) . Since you *are* a small business, you definitely do NOT have a full time Linux admin on staff. You outsource your support. And it is typically expensive, say $60 - $90 / hr for service calls. Now, your small business accounting system, which is business critical btw, runs on Windows currently. If you convert to Linux, you need to convert accounting systems. A recent upgrade JUST from a windows system to another windows system that I am personally aware of, cost the small business $6K for the software licenses and $10K in consulting labor to do the upgrade. This does not factor in lost productivity, training costs, etc. I could go on about retraining the staff to use open office instead of MS office, problems exchanging powerpoint presentations with other small businesses, etc, etc, but I'm sure you get the idea. Now don't get me wrong, I like Linux, and use it at home for hobbyist programming, and it is great for web servers and custom apps, but imho Linux is just not cost effective or practical for small business destops.
  • QuimZ, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The great part, is the fact that a few good points from the commentors on this are being dugg down....Can Digg put up an aptitude test before registration? Think Kevin would be into that?
  • kolop1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5 Oh one more point. What company upgrades the OS on an old PC? My company still uses computers running NT on the old P3 systems.As well as Windows xp on the newer PCs. They will not upgrade their old Pcs. They will just integrate Vista when is comes shipped on the new PCs.

    I can not imagine going to my supervisor. Telling him to over hall his Windows environment, to run Linux. I'm quite sure I would be fired.

    Yeah open office is free, but most people used MS Office. try telling your boss that you have to convert everything to open office. Good luck.
    • bacon_skoda, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4what? are you saying every office doesn't have an linux expert ready to go?
  • ZeroG52, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3"For starters, you can't run the fancy 3D, translucent Aero Glass on it. Minus the pretty Glass bits, Aero was OK. SLED, on the other hand, had no trouble delivering the pretty desktop goodies with Xgl.

    For Vista, if you want good graphics, you really need a DirectX 9-compliant 3D 128-MB video card that supports Pixel Shader 2.0 in hardware a WDDM (Windows Device Driver Model) driver. You'll do a lot better, though, with 256MB of RAM."

    I stopped reading here because this is a blatant lie. I have a Dell Optiplex G620 with an Intel onboard graphics adapter that in no way supports PS 2.0 and it runs Aero with full glass effects on RC1 FINE. No Digg for Linux fanboy.
    • Edgardo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7AFAIK the Dell Optiplex you mention comes with an intel GMA 950

      http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/gma950/index.htm

      And yes it supports PS 2.0, that is why Aero is working.

      Do you even know whats inside your PC? :)
    • ZeroG52, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Ahhhh touche! I had tried to run some graphics benchmark program a while back when we got these and I thought it errored out because of the lack of support......I must have been using an older Dell. Sorry for the mixup, I'd delete the comment if I could. Still, this is a heavily biased article, but I did finish reading it. We have an arrangement with MS here so cost is negligible (5000+ desktops to worry about, no way am I re-training them for Linux! They'll be just fine in Vista.) Bottom line, Linux is improving, but is WAY to inconsistent for me to consider implementing in my enterprise.
  • jackspack, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well gee, this sure is a fair and balanced story. I certainly will go right out and change all of my desktops to sled because the linuxdesktop people said windows is not good.

    People who have a minimal it budget won't invest in old hardware. they will simply work with what they have until they have the $ to buy new hardware that they can throw a vista image on. Think a little bit, how much would it csost to train the users who can barley use windows, to use linux? Chances are, if your in a shop with a small IT budget, you probably don't have a *nix guru there anyway. And what about apps that simply do not run on linux? I mean come on guys, when will you morons wake the ***** up and come out of this fantasy world?
  • drwatson, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Here's what you do: Wait 48 for the activation to be hacked out, or for a corporate copy to leak onto bittorent.
  • repruhsent, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Can I run SLED? Yes. Would I want to? Hell no. Windows works just fine - what's the point in killing my partitions for SLED, which will not work with all of my hardware?
  • huggiesmiff, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I love this guy how this guy starts his story with an end-of-days windows virus in 2007. First of all, if your man enough to run this sort of an upgrade, you should have the gonads to protect ur XP boxes properly.

    That being said, im sure your small office users will LOVE the sudden change in OS.
  • lclemente, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0Buy a mac.
  • wwaller, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I refuse to believe that there is any simple way to transfer an entire office from one OS to another. This article glossed over the entire process by screaming cheap cheap cheap. I don't buy it. What do you do with an entire IT department whose sole speciality is to know Windows inside and out?
  • hakrzcode, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1As a strong dedicated Linux user, I am buring this article for lameness and FUD. Choice of operating systems is a personal choice, and also depends on what you are using it for. As the guy above says that he keeps his Windows around for gaming.
  • jlunski, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Two glaringly obvious points that the author glossed over:

    1. Nobody NEEDS to upgrade their corporate PC to Vista
    2. How much is it going to cost to train an IT department to be able to support Linux or train users how to do the comparable thing in Linux that they're used to doing in Windows?

    Should be buried for being LAME!
  • cashcash, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1How come you never see a story on Digg knocking Mac OS and the price of Mac OS vs Ubuntu etc.

    Digg is starting to be nothing more than a freshly baked /.
    • gmillerd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Might be hard to write that one, the TCO for Apple is much lower than Windows.
  • 9tailfox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4One place to find a collective of Zealot A-Holes is Digg.
  • Frebis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4There is no question, every "real" company will put windows products on their computers, without thinking about it. With the exception of the Cuban and Indian Governemnts, Google, and a handfull of highschool dorks who think they are computer savy, Eveyrone will run WIndows Vista.
  • bgbs, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Ok, enough fantasy, no company is going to give up windows for linux. At the end of the day it's too much trouble.
  • Ben64, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Linux is better for everything except for games...
    • gmillerd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1And Flash9 (ok that was cheap), but graphics and video, anything to do with buying a device and Christmas time and wanting to use it, using exchange, using most PDAs ... list goes on.
    • Ben64, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Ah, a very nice example of ignorance at work.

      "And Flash9 (ok that was cheap), but graphics and video, anything to do with buying a device and Christmas time and wanting to use it, using exchange, using most PDAs ... list goes on."

      Ok lets see... flash9 for linux is almost done, most things don't even require it yet.

      Graphics... Photoshop, GIMP aren't good enough?

      Mencoder is one of the most advanced video encoders around.
      Mplayer/ Xine are very good at playing videos (and no need to worry about codec ***** like on windows)

      I've never come across a device that wouldn't work on linux. 99% of errors with that kind of thing are user error (USB goes where?).

      And exchange interoperability works fine (although who the hell wants exchange anyway)
  • liquilife, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The basic everyday user is very accustomed to upgrades on their windows system. Most have gone through at least the round from 98 through XP. Moving to Vista will not daunt them.

    The big problem with OS's such as Ubuntu (actually it's just a great example): I have a ATI Radeon Xpress 200 graphics card. Sure, it's not the absolute best for hardcore gaming but it serves my multimedia purposes more then fine. Do you think it works with Ubuntu? No, of course not! When researching the issue I am told that I should perhaps get a new graphics card. Excuse me??

    Could you imagine a corporation moving to Linux? Sure the upgrade cost may be cheaper but the level of in-house tech/computer support needed would be sure to make up the difference plus more along with a lot of frusterated employees.
    • Ben64, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1it does work on ubuntu
    • liquilife, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yes it does technically. At a resolution lower then 800x600. At least this was the case less then a month ago. If you can show me of any updates that resolved this issue i'd be happy to see it!
  • skuzmak, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1No job, no money, lots of time on your hands? Use Linux, go nuts. I don't mind shelling out the cash for Vista, it's clean and easy to use. I'm not interested in the operating system anyway, I'm interested in the applications.
  • skaface69, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1linux sucks, Windows pwns! just admit it linux nerds
  • endjynn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I don't know about anyone else but I'm getting really tired of Digg being filled with utterly shameless anti-microsoft propaganda.
    It's boring and uninformative. Buried.
    • bgbs, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1You are 101% right. And they all(from MAC to Linux) sit in their caves and wonder how come we dont by their anti-American-Microsoft propoganda? By now we should have, they assume.

  • JrGhoull, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1in order to decide between the two you would have to know about linux in the first place. if i was a real computer wizz like i'm sure many of the people on digg are then i probably would never use windows again. But for the average joe who isnt even following this, he'll buy a new computer at some point and be like "oh hey it looks like they made a new windows operating thingy"
  • Beaver6813, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Agreed with endjynn. I mean just looking at the description of this article it just seems plainly biased:

    "Do you put on Vista" or "Linux that comes with business support like SLED (SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop) 10."

    If that isn't biased i dont know what is, how about:

    "Do you put on Vista that will eventually be adopted by most major companies because of its shear user-base and way of deployment" or "Linux that comes with business support like SLED (SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop) 10."

    Now which way is it biased?
  • dmadzak, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5This has to be the stupidest article posted in awhile. If you are planning an upgrade a typical migration path for a window shop isn't Linux. Its not like all the money invested in software is going to work on Linux.

    Lets be real. Here is how the conversation would play out.

    Employee: Hello Mr. CFO I think we should move all computers to Linux, Vista is too expensive.
    CFO: Really, what about all the software we currently have.
    Employee: Well there are usually open source alternatives that are free.
    CFO: Thats nice but we have already paid for the software.
    Employee: Its open source
    CFO: Who cares?
    CFO: How much will it cost to migrate?
    Employee: Nothing
    CFO: Really what about the time to setup the machines and train the users.
    Employee: It is intuitive and doesn't require much training.
    CFO: That is why you will not advance at this company you don't understand the needs of employees outside of your little unix world. Also, even if each program only takes a few hours of ramp up speed, multiply that by the number of users times the number of applications and add the time to install all the new software plus help desk training and there is no cost benefit in the near term plus all the non unix employees will most likely reject it lowering morale. Get out of my office.
  • pweegar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Hmmm. Linux is free.. Really? Enterprise support isn't. Training or hiring new staff isn't, converting WORKING existing software isn't free (you still need staff/software/tools, etc for the conversion), training users isn't, etc

    So, Linux is free? Not really. Hardware may/may not be compatible. Where i work, I have hardware that doesn't run under Linux.

    Users don't really care what OS they use as long as they can get their jobs done. And what OS do the vast majority of users use? WINDOWS. Not OX X, not Linux, WINDOWS. And IF you replace their existing desktop, you better believe they want to see the exact same windows as they are used too.

    Then there is all the old equipment a large company has. Including Win95/98. How well will the current crop of Linux distros work with 32 MB of RAM? And MAYBE a 20 GB HD????

    I work in a large company with a large number of such PCs.

    And what does Linux do that Windows won't? Crash? Not likely. I've seen both crash, esp. if hardware fails.

    Linux out performs Windows? On the contrary, I generally find Linux to run slower on the same equipment. And I've run Vista Beta1 just fine on a laptop with 512 MB of Ram and a 4200 RPM hd. Sure I turn off the eye candy, but always turn it off. I want the performance over eye candy anytime.

    Secure? Hmm and where did the first worm show up? On a UNIX system. The potential is there, for Linux to be as open to attack as windows.

    Sorry, but Linux really isn't free. Nor is it all that attractive as a replacement to Windows, whether the Linux zealots wish it were so or not.
  • Archer1980, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@eqisow

    So, if i understand you correctly, no one that knows more then click, double click and wheres my internet should be using a computer? So, then that would probably eliminate say 50% of the worlds computers, cuz most people in big offices a lot of them that's all they know how to do, oo yeah, along with word processing and maybe email.

    You honestly think that someone that only knows click, double click and using the internet should be on Linux? I'll tell you right now if that's the case, i'll gladly help you throw out 75% of government office computers, maybe from the top floor so they explode on impact.
    • Ben64, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1actually, for just the "i need to check my yahoo email" people, I cannot think of any reason not to go with linux.

      no virus worries, internet works great.
    • bonked, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@Archer - In my recent experience, most common users have rather enjoyed using Kubuntu over Windows, why, because it works the way they expect it to, only some program names have changed. Remember, most users only do a few tasks - run office apps, read e-mail, browse the web and run specific software for their business. Not download and install etc.

      Admittedly, on the PCs I have set up, I have went so far as renaming some shortcuts (e.g. instead of the default shortcut name "OpenOffice.org Writer" the shortcut is named "OO Writer - Similar to MS Word"; "OpenOffice.org Calc" becomes "OO Calc - Similar to Excel"; "Firefox" becomes "Firefox - Similar to Internet Explorer")

      The only comments I have heard from these users (more than 20) that had always used windows have been positive (e.g. "I like it so much more, it's faster." "I like it because it looks nicer." etc.) and most of them tell me they are much more productive.

      I have yet to have to download a driver to get Kubuntu to work out of the box. So, yes, the average user (especially in a business environment) would be much better served by Linux than Windows. I especially feel that Government agencies should be forced to use OpenSource wherever possible - there is no reason to piss away all this money for Windows - especially considering the amount of training that goes on to get people to the point of knowing how a mouse and keyboard work.

      Yes, power users that download and install software, etc. may need more retraining, but these are the people that tend to be easier to train.
    • JorgeGT, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I tried to set up my old computer with Mandrake 10 (I dind't know much about distros and that looked easy) just to browse the internet and such. I was so happy (look dad, free! ) and then... my audio card doesn't works! why? My windows 2000 supported it!

      I dind't figure how to get it work. Well. But then the modem. Not to talk about installing/uninstalling programs. Lots and lots of different packages with different versions and strange names. Then the console commands...owww... And finally... that Samba, you know, like the dance style. configuration textfiles, linux forums and obscure commands that I copied-pasted from forums are still attacking me in dreams.

      You linux elite will laught at me, but, hell, I don't enjoy fighting with my OS. I managed to get my old ISA SoundBlaster 16 working under Windows, and obviously all the compatibility problems dissapeared. So that's the OS I used. End of story.
    • bonked, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Mandrake 10 is 2 years old, and even according to the folks inside Mandriva it was one of their worst releases (it's viewed kinda like Windows ME by a lot of Mandriva fans.)

      2 years is an eternity in the Linux world - and also, Mandriva (my first distro was Mandrake 9) had some weird issues with the way they handled audio drivers - I had the exact same problem you describe in Mandriva 10, I read somewhere online that if you swapped the mic and speaker cables it would work and it did - Ubuntu and Kubuntu though have been rock solid with none of those oddities.

      Also, you have to blame the manufacturer of the hardware in a lot of those cases, but driver support for Linux has been gaining exeptionally - and when hardware manufacturers are seeing groundswell like they are (Ubuntu has seen roughly 8-10% user base growth each month since the release of dapper drake,) more and more are providing support. Just like Linux fanboys look foolish when they say "When I installed Windows ME it crashed a lot, so Windows is bad" Windows users look foolish when they say "Linux doesn't have good driver support, I know because I tried it 3 years ago."
  • moracity, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I think MS is in for a rude awakening when it comes to the business market. There are a LOT of businesses that are still on Windows 2000 or just upgraded to XP. So far, there doesn't appear to be any compelling reason for a business to upgrade to Vista.

    I think Apple should take advantage of the Vista debacle and ship a business-oriented desktop to start pushing OS X into the workplace.
    • ChiliFrei64, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Apple has the best chance of any other OS out there to take over the PC market.. because it is a complete OS with real software with real support and an intuitive interface that makes things easy.. but even that wont happen because of business class application support...
    • dmadzak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yes, because it makes perfect sense for a consumer oriented company like Apple to change strategies on a dime to capitalize on a slow Microsoft release into a highly competitive market where they have no advantage. Makes perfect sense to me. How long will Vista be out before Apple can do this?
    • skaface69, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1oh yeah, Mac, their good

      mac's sucks, Windows pwns! admit it mac nerds
    • bonked, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@skaface

      Their - possessive, showing ownership
      They're - contraction meaning "They are"
  • ChiliFrei64, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The answer is simple.. you stick with MS for the reason dmadzak stated..I have a hard enough time getting people to do what they need to do on a PC rather than trying to walk someone over a phone trying to get X reconfigured or explaining to my boss.. No.. that application doesnt work with linux or no you cant use your exchange server(that you spent alot of money on) to share your calendar.. linux doesnt support it...There are just too many reasons still why you dont upgrade yet.. Besides..end users that dont know enough about computers stick with what they know.. they have a pc at home and know that if they press the start button, they see their apps.. if you change even the look(2000 to XP) people throw a hissy..

  • metalhead3767, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0This guy wrote an article before just like this one. You can read the comments here:
    http://www.desktoplinux.com/cgi-bin/board/UltraBoard.pl?Action=ShowPost&Board=talkbacks&Post=325&Idle=0&Sort=0&Order=Descend&Page=0&Session=
    He actually used the same system and almost everyone said "Look you stupid n00b you cant run areo on integrated graphics!" He also had other arguments like "If you use flash memory for storage your dog could eat it." This guy sucks at writing articles and using computers.
    I use windows and Linux. And here is the truth: Linux is a lot harder to use then Windows. On windows if you want to get anything installed (drivers, programs) its next, next, next, finish. On Linux if you cant find what your looking for in some repository your gona be entering commands. They need to make Linux easy. Linux people have an idea that everyone can use Linux because they have a magical Linux fairy that will help get them set it up. We don't. Linux IS hard to get set up. But once you set it up it is pretty good.
  • ThinkFr33ly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I've been running Vista on a VERY old Athlon 1.2 Ghz machine with 512MB of ram and a $50 Radeon 9800. Would I recommend using this machine as your primary machine? No. But if it had 1GB of ram (a $30 upgrade) I definitly would. It's not bad at all... on par with XP, even with Aero Glass enabled.

    "The problem with this idea is that almost no PCs have significant amounts of flash memory installed and flash-enabled "hybrid" drives, aren't here yet."

    Um, go buy at $20 1GB USB key and plug it in to a free USB port. Done. Not that hard, buddy.

    "by saying that it can make use of flash memory for what boils down to the ancient speed-up idea of disk caching. "

    Um, except it's not. Nobody has implemented this kind of caching before... including Linux. If it's so ancient, why isn't it in your pet OS?

    Seems to me that this is just FUD spread by a Linux advocate who fears that Vista is the final nail on the coffin of deskop linux.
    • Ben64, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4You know, USB drives can only handle so much write cycles before they pop.

      And certainly the no name $20 for a gig one isnt going to be alive for long with all that swapping going on.
  • shaun1018, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Linux is only free if your time is worth nothing. - Unknown
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 65 of 65 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.