Windows Vista or Ubuntu Linux?

[NetDiag]

Which do you think is better and why? One costs £325 for the all singing all dancing version and the other costs nill, nada, not a sausage.

 

Join the great debate now and post your reasons why one is better than the other.

[CyberNerd]

Vista doesn't actually do anything out of the box - it is just a platform to install commercial software onto. Ubuntu comes with 18000 packages of free software - it is a complete system rather than a platform. You can't compare the two, its apples and oranges.

[mrforgetful]

Vista because I'm a Micro$oft wh0re!!!!1!1

[webman]

Ubuntu because it gives you more freedom.

[ind13]

Vista doesn't actually do anything out of the box - it is just a platform to install commercial software onto. Ubuntu comes with 18000 packages of free software - it is a complete system rather than a platform. You can't compare the two, its apples and oranges.

 

vista does quite a few things out of the box

 

internet explorer

windows mail

calendar

paint

cd/dvd writer

media player

wordpad

games

 

linux wins hands down

but vista it not just a platform for comercial software,

ubuntu doesn't come with 18000 packages it just makes them easy to install.

wouldn't be hard to create a webpage with a list of thousands of pieces of software for windows.

 

anyway i vote ubuntu

[Disease]

I vote Vista, because Linux is crap, seeing as Windows holds over 80% market share they can't all be wrong.

[Geoff]

Already using Ubuntu on my home PC (AMD64 version too). Vista64 doesn't work sensibly on my AMD64 box.

[Disease]

I have an AMD 64 machine at home as my server and Ubuntu Linux is always falling over on it (and before anyone starts it runs windows flawlessly).

 

My Main MAchine I run vista on and it is as smooth as silk.

[NetDiag]

Well I dont agree entirely with disease on that comment about Linux. Of course Linux is a pain to set up and configure but once you are over that hurdle it is just as easy to use as Vista. My only concern with vista is the spec and how it turns my usually cool pc into a overheated furnance.

 

I have to say that XP was a hell of an improvement over Windows 98 but I just can't see the benefits of Vista over XP over than pretty eye candy. At the moment Vista has serious compatibility issues as is just to darn slow. Not only that it's not practical as you can't really do anything in a hurry on Vista because M$ have been annoying and moved everything around.

 

In my opinion there are just too many annoyances in Vista to justify it's high price tag. In fact i'm so put off by Vista that I don't think I would waste a good DVD-R with a bootleg copy let alone fork out hundreds of pounds to M$ for a legit copy. I think i would rather put the money towards a new PC and install Kubuntu on that.

 

There, thats my 2pence worth, rant over for now.

[Geoff]

We have 2 AMD64 servers here running Ubuntu Server (AMD64). Both are LAMP servers. One runs http://vle.carrhill.lancs.sch.uk and it's uptime is currently 125 days.

[Disease]

I think i would rather put the money towards a new PC and install Kubuntu on that.

 

 

That's the trouble with Linux Users they build a decent PC and then spoil it by putting Linux on it.

 

Linux does not know what to do when swamped with more than 36k of Ram.

[webman]

One runs http://vle.carrhill.lancs.sch.uk and it's uptime is currently 125 days.

 

I had 197 days once. Only lost that as I had to move house

 

I vote Vista, because Linux is crap

 

How so?

[Geoff]

The LAMP server running the VLE has two dual core cpus and 2gb of ram. It also runs with dual 1Gbit nics. Perhaps you'd like to see some sysstat times Disease?

[Disease]

We have 2 AMD64 servers here running Ubuntu Server (AMD64). Both are LAMP servers. One runs http://vle.carrhill.lancs.sch.uk and it's uptime is currently 125 days.

 

 

Cool, I have 13 Windows 2003 servers running all kinds of things, current uptime for all 250+ days .

[mrforgetful]

Do they make many games for Linux yet?

[webman]

Cool, I have 13 Windows 2003 servers running all kinds of things, current uptime for all 250+ days .

 

So, ~19 days each then? 8)

[Disease]

Do they make many games for Linux yet?

 

 

LOL

[Disease]

Cool, I have 13 Windows 2003 servers running all kinds of things, current uptime for all 250+ days .

 

So, ~19 days each then? 8)

 

hehe

 

You know what I mean.

[daveyboy]

We have 2 AMD64 servers here running Ubuntu Server (AMD64). Both are LAMP servers. One runs vle.carrhill.lancs.sch.uk and it's uptime is currently 125 days.

 

 

 

 

Check these Novell Workhorses

[webman]

Sure.

 

The vote is going well I see

[CyberNerd]

mrforgetful wrote:

Do they make many games for Linux yet?

 

would recommend TCE for 1st person shooter fans.

http://www.truecombatelite.com/

 

of course you don't have to pay £30 for it

[mrforgetful]

mrforgetful wrote:

Do they make many games for Linux yet?

 

would recommend TCE for 1st person shooter fans.

http://www.truecombatelite.com/

 

of course you don't have to pay £30 for it

 

That's great, but I mean can I walk into CEX or Game or Gamestation, or pick one up from Tesco?

 

Y'know, can I play the same thing that my mates are playing? The same thing 80% of other people are playing? Something where most other people I play with won't think http://www.thinkgeek.com is the greatest online shop?

[webman]

It's not Linux's fault that game developers don't make their games for Linux. It's possible - UT2004 (and many others) work on both.

[Disease]

 

of course you don't have to pay £30 for it

 

Thats because it's crap, I mean come on it's not Half Life 2 or Crysis is it.

[NetDiag]

Whats wrong with you people? Complaining that their are no games for Linux? Of course there are:

 

I have had my recent fixes on the following:

 

Ascii Text space invaders

Ascii Pong

Ascii Pacman

+ Ascii hide the salami

 

 

Come on! Theres no games? Of course there are! You don't need an overclocked overpriced Nvidia card to appreciate them either! All you need is 36K ram